• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

非常薄支架治疗无保护左主干或冠状动脉分叉病变患者的 PARIS 评分和 PCI 复杂度对缺血事件的预测准确性。

Accuracy of the PARIS score and PCI complexity to predict ischemic events in patients treated with very thin stents in unprotected left main or coronary bifurcations.

机构信息

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Policlinic "G. Martino", University of Messina, Messina, Italy.

出版信息

Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Feb 1;97(2):E227-E236. doi: 10.1002/ccd.28972. Epub 2020 May 21.

DOI:10.1002/ccd.28972
PMID:32438488
Abstract

BACKGROUND

The PARIS risk score (PARIS-rs) and percutaneous coronary intervention complexity (PCI-c) predict clinical and procedural residual ischemic risk following PCI. Their accuracy in patients undergoing unprotected left main (ULM) or bifurcation PCI has not been assessed.

METHODS

The predictive performances of the PARIS-rs (categorized as low, intermediate, and high) and PCI-c (according to guideline-endorsed criteria) were evaluated in 3,002 patients undergoing ULM/bifurcation PCI with very thin strut stents.

RESULTS

After 16 (12-22) months, increasing PARIS-rs (8.8% vs. 14.1% vs. 27.4%, p < .001) and PCI-c (15.2% vs. 11%, p = .025) were associated with higher rates of major adverse cardiac events ([MACE], a composite of death, myocardial infarction [MI], and target vessel revascularization), driven by MI/death for PARIS-rs and target lesion revascularization/stent thrombosis for PCI-c (area under the curves for MACE: PARIS-rs 0.60 vs. PCI-c 0.52, p-for-difference < .001). PCI-c accuracy for MACE was higher in low-clinical-risk patients; while PARIS-rs was more accurate in low-procedural-risk patients. ≥12-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) was associated with a lower MACE rate in high PARIS-rs patients, (adjusted-hazard ratio 0.42 [95% CI: 0.22-0.83], p = .012), with no benefit in low to intermediate PARIS-rs patients. No incremental benefit with longer DAPT was observed in complex PCI.

CONCLUSIONS

In the setting of ULM/bifurcation PCI, the residual ischemic risk is better predicted by a clinical risk estimator than by PCI complexity, which rather appears to reflect stent/procedure-related events. Careful procedural risk estimation is warranted in patients at low clinical risk, where PCI complexity may substantially contribute to the overall residual ischemic risk.

摘要

背景

PARIS 风险评分(PARIS-rs)和经皮冠状动脉介入治疗复杂性(PCI-c)可预测 PCI 后临床和手术残留缺血风险。它们在接受非保护左主干(ULM)或分叉 PCI 的患者中的准确性尚未得到评估。

方法

在 3002 例接受非常薄支架的 ULM/分叉 PCI 的患者中,评估了 PARIS-rs(分为低、中和高)和 PCI-c(根据指南推荐标准)的预测性能。

结果

16(12-22)个月后,PARIS-rs 增加(8.8% vs. 14.1% vs. 27.4%,p<0.001)和 PCI-c 增加(15.2% vs. 11%,p=0.025)与主要不良心脏事件(MACE,死亡、心肌梗死[MI]和靶血管血运重建的复合终点)发生率较高相关,PARIS-rs 与 MI/死亡相关,PCI-c 与靶病变血运重建/支架血栓形成相关(MACE 的曲线下面积:PARIS-rs 为 0.60,PCI-c 为 0.52,p 差值<.001)。低临床风险患者中,PCI-c 对 MACE 的准确性更高;而低手术风险患者中,PARIS-rs 更准确。高 PARIS-rs 患者接受≥12 个月的双联抗血小板治疗(DAPT)与 MACE 发生率降低相关(调整后的危险比 0.42[95%CI:0.22-0.83],p=0.012),而在低至中等 PARIS-rs 患者中没有获益。在复杂 PCI 中,延长 DAPT 没有观察到额外获益。

结论

在 ULM/分叉 PCI 中,残留缺血风险的预测效果优于 PCI 复杂性,后者似乎更能反映支架/手术相关事件。在低临床风险患者中,需要仔细进行手术风险评估,因为 PCI 复杂性可能会大大增加总体残留缺血风险。

相似文献

1
Accuracy of the PARIS score and PCI complexity to predict ischemic events in patients treated with very thin stents in unprotected left main or coronary bifurcations.非常薄支架治疗无保护左主干或冠状动脉分叉病变患者的 PARIS 评分和 PCI 复杂度对缺血事件的预测准确性。
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Feb 1;97(2):E227-E236. doi: 10.1002/ccd.28972. Epub 2020 May 21.
2
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Complexity and Risk of Adverse Events in relation to High Bleeding Risk among Patients Receiving Drug-Eluting Stents: Insights from a Large Single-Center Cohort Study.药物洗脱支架置入患者中,经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的复杂性及与高出血风险相关的不良事件风险:一项大型单中心队列研究的见解
J Interv Cardiol. 2020 Apr 25;2020:2985435. doi: 10.1155/2020/2985435. eCollection 2020.
3
Safety and efficacy of polymer-free biolimus-eluting stents versus ultrathin stents in unprotected left main or coronary bifurcation: A propensity score analysis from the RAIN and CHANCE registries.聚合物涂层雷帕霉素洗脱支架与超薄支架治疗无保护左主干或冠状动脉分叉病变的安全性和疗效:RAIN 和 CHANCE 注册研究的倾向评分分析。
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 Feb 15;95(3):522-529. doi: 10.1002/ccd.28413. Epub 2019 Aug 5.
4
Lesion Complexity and Outcomes of Extended Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后病变复杂性与延长双联抗血小板治疗的结果
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Oct 31;70(18):2213-2223. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.09.011.
5
Cessation of dual antiplatelet treatment and cardiac events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PARIS): 2 year results from a prospective observational study.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PARIS)后双联抗血小板治疗停药与心脏事件:前瞻性观察研究的 2 年结果。
Lancet. 2013 Nov 23;382(9906):1714-22. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61720-1. Epub 2013 Sep 1.
6
Patterns and associations between DAPT cessation and 2-year clinical outcomes in left main/proximal LAD versus other PCI: Results from the Patterns of Non-Adherence to Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Stented Patients (PARIS) registry.左主干/近端左前降支与其他 PCI 之间 DAPT 停药的模式和关联:来自支架患者双联抗血小板治疗不依从模式(PARIS)登记处的结果。
Int J Cardiol. 2017 Sep 15;243:132-139. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.05.049. Epub 2017 May 12.
7
Incidence of Adverse Events at 3 Months Versus at 12 Months After Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Cessation in Patients Treated With Thin Stents With Unprotected Left Main or Coronary Bifurcations.薄支架治疗无保护左主干或冠状动脉分叉病变患者停用双联抗血小板治疗后 3 个月与 12 个月不良事件发生率。
Am J Cardiol. 2020 Feb 15;125(4):491-499. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2019.10.058. Epub 2019 Nov 23.
8
Impact of percutaneous coronary intervention extent, complexity and platelet reactivity on outcomes after drug-eluting stent implantation.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗程度、复杂性和血小板反应性对药物洗脱支架植入术后结局的影响。
Int J Cardiol. 2018 Oct 1;268:61-67. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.03.103.
9
Percutaneous coronary intervention of unprotected left main and bifurcation in octogenarians: Subanalysis from RAIN (veRy thin stents for patients with left mAIn or bifurcatioN in real life).高龄患者非保护左主干和分叉病变的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗:RAIN 研究(真实世界中左主干或分叉病变患者应用极细支架的亚组分析)。
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Apr 1;97(5):755-763. doi: 10.1002/ccd.29048. Epub 2020 Jun 1.
10
Long-term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention for ostial/mid-shaft lesions versus distal bifurcation lesions in unprotected left main coronary artery: the DELTA Registry (drug-eluting stent for left main coronary artery disease): a multicenter registry evaluating percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting for left main treatment.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗开口/中段病变与无保护左主干冠状动脉分叉病变的长期临床结局:DELTA 注册研究(左主干冠状动脉疾病药物洗脱支架):一项多中心注册研究,评估经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗左主干的疗效。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Dec;6(12):1242-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.08.005.

引用本文的文献

1
Temporal Trends in Complex Percutaneous Coronary Interventions.复杂经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的时间趋势
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Jun 24;9:913588. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.913588. eCollection 2022.
2
Prediction of All-Cause Mortality Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Bifurcation Lesions Using Machine Learning Algorithms.使用机器学习算法预测分叉病变经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后的全因死亡率
J Pers Med. 2022 Jun 17;12(6):990. doi: 10.3390/jpm12060990.
3
Practice Patterns in the Interventional Treatment of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions: A Global Survey.
经皮冠状动脉介入治疗分叉病变的实践模式:全球调查。
J Invasive Cardiol. 2022 Jan;34(1):E43-E48. doi: 10.25270/jic/21.00077.
4
Prognostic and Practical Validation of ESC/EACTS High Ischemic Risk Definition on Long-Term Thrombotic and Bleeding Events in Contemporary PCI Patients.ESC/EACTS 高缺血风险定义对当代 PCI 患者长期血栓和出血事件的预后和实用验证。
J Atheroscler Thromb. 2022 Apr 1;29(4):502-526. doi: 10.5551/jat.60129. Epub 2021 Mar 20.