Suppr超能文献

比较药物洗脱支架和裸金属支架在透析终末期肾病患者中的Meta 分析。

Drug-eluting compared to bare metal stents in patients with end-stage renal disease on dialysis: a meta-analysis.

机构信息

Division of Cardiology, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia.

Coronary Care Unit and Catheterization Laboratory, A.O.U. Maggiore della Carità, Novara.

出版信息

J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2019 May;20(5):313-320. doi: 10.2459/JCM.0000000000000755.

Abstract

AIMS

To systematically review literature comparing bare metal stent (BMS) to drug-eluting stent (DES) in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients on dialysis. ESRD patients on dialysis often suffer from accelerated atherosclerosis and higher rate of stent-related complications including major adverse cardiovascular events. Because dialysis usually qualifies ineligibility for randomized clinical trials, an evidenced-based stent choice for these patients is scarce.

METHODS

PUBMED, CINHAL, COCHRANE, EMBASE and WEB OF SCIENCE were searched for studies comparing BMS vs. DES outcome in ESRD patients on dialysis.

RESULTS

Twenty studies including 64 232 patients were considered. The use of DES was significantly associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.89], death from a cardiovascular cause (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.76-0.84) and target lesion revascularization/target vessel revascularization (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53-1.00). No significant difference was found in stent thrombosis (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.50-2.33) and myocardial infarction incidence (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.69-1.20).

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis shows a significant reduction in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality with the use of DES over BMS in dialyzed patients. Despite the lack of randomized studies, systematic use of DES in these high-risk patients should thus reasonably be considered as a first option in percutaneous coronary intervention candidates.

摘要

目的

系统回顾比较终末期肾病(ESRD)透析患者使用裸金属支架(BMS)与药物洗脱支架(DES)的文献。ESRD 透析患者常患有加速动脉粥样硬化和更高的支架相关并发症发生率,包括主要不良心血管事件。由于透析通常使患者不符合随机临床试验的资格,因此缺乏针对这些患者的基于证据的支架选择。

方法

检索 PUBMED、CINHAL、COCHRANE、EMBASE 和 WEB OF SCIENCE,以比较 ESRD 透析患者使用 BMS 与 DES 的结果。

结果

共纳入 20 项研究,包括 64232 例患者。DES 的使用与全因死亡率降低显著相关[比值比(OR)0.83,95%置信区间(CI)0.76-0.89]、心血管原因死亡(OR 0.80,95%CI 0.76-0.84)和靶病变血运重建/靶血管血运重建(OR 0.73,95%CI 0.53-1.00)。支架血栓形成(OR 1.08,95%CI 0.50-2.33)和心肌梗死发生率(OR 0.91,95%CI 0.69-1.20)无显著差异。

结论

我们的荟萃分析表明,在透析患者中,与 BMS 相比,DES 的使用显著降低了全因和心血管死亡率。尽管缺乏随机研究,但在这些高危患者中系统使用 DES 应合理地被视为经皮冠状动脉介入治疗候选者的首选。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验