Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University and Beijing Institute of Heart, Lung and Blood Vessel Diseases, Beijing, China.
Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University and Beijing Institute of Heart, Lung and Blood Vessel Diseases, Beijing, China.
Am J Cardiol. 2019 Aug 1;124(3):334-342. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2019.04.048. Epub 2019 May 8.
The relative benefit of staged percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus culprit-only PCI in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary disease remains disputable. Therefore, we conducted this study to compare the long-term outcomes of staged complete revascularization and culprit-only PCI in this population. A total of 1,205 patients were treated with staged PCI (n = 576) or culprit-only PCI (n = 629) from January 2006 to December 2015 in our center. After propensity-score matching, 415 pairs of patients were identified, and postmatching absolute standardized differences were <10% for all covariates. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE), defined as a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or unplanned revascularization. The mean follow-up duration was 5 years. Overall, staged complete revascularization was associated with lower risks of MACCE, MI, unplanned revascularization, and a composite of cardiac death, MI or stroke compared with culprit-only PCI in both overall population and propensity-matched cohorts. In Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, the strategy of staged PCI was consistently a significant predictor of lower incidences of MACCE, MI, unplanned revascularization and a composite of cardiac death, MI, or stroke. However, there was no difference in the risks of MACCE, MI and unplanned revascularization between the 2 approaches for diabetic patients. In conclusion, among patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease who underwent primary PCI, an approach of staged complete revascularization is superior to culprit-only PCI at 5-year follow-up. Nevertheless, the advantage of staged PCI is attenuated in diabetic patients.
在 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死和多支血管病变患者中,分期经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)与罪犯血管 PCI 相比的相对益处仍存在争议。因此,我们进行了这项研究,以比较该人群中分期完全血运重建与罪犯血管 PCI 的长期结局。2006 年 1 月至 2015 年 12 月,我们中心共对 1205 例患者进行了分期 PCI(n=576)或罪犯血管 PCI(n=629)治疗。在倾向评分匹配后,共确定了 415 对患者,所有协变量的匹配后绝对标准化差异均<10%。主要终点是主要不良心脏和脑血管事件(MACCE),定义为全因死亡、心肌梗死(MI)、卒中和计划外血运重建的复合事件。平均随访时间为 5 年。总体而言,在全人群和倾向匹配队列中,分期完全血运重建与罪犯血管 PCI 相比,MACCE、MI、计划外血运重建以及心脏性死亡、MI 或卒中等复合终点的风险均较低。在 Cox 比例风险回归分析中,分期 PCI 策略始终是 MACCE、MI、计划外血运重建和心脏性死亡、MI 或卒中等复合终点发生率较低的显著预测因素。然而,对于糖尿病患者,两种方法在 MACCE、MI 和计划外血运重建的风险方面没有差异。总之,在接受直接 PCI 的 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死和多支血管病变患者中,分期完全血运重建在 5 年随访时优于罪犯血管 PCI。然而,在糖尿病患者中,分期 PCI 的优势减弱。