Kim Yong Hoon, Her Ae-Young, Jeong Myung Ho, Kim Byeong-Keuk, Hong Sung-Jin, Kim Seunghwan, Ahn Chul-Min, Kim Jung-Sun, Ko Young-Guk, Choi Donghoon, Hong Myeong-Ki, Jang Yangsoo
Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangwon National University School of Medicine.
Department of Cardiology, Cardiovascular Center, Chonnam National University Hospital.
Int Heart J. 2020 Jul 30;61(4):673-684. doi: 10.1536/ihj.19-654. Epub 2020 Jul 18.
Hyperglycemia is an important risk factor for poor clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The relative superiority of the long-term clinical outcomes of durable-polymer (DP) -based and biodegradable-polymer (BP) -based newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) after successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with AMI and prediabetes is not well established. We compared the clinical outcomes in such patients between DP-based and BP-based newer-generation DESs.A total of 4,377 patients with AMI and prediabetes were divided into the following two groups: the DP-DES group (n = 3,775; zotarolimus-eluting stents [ZES; n = 1,546] and everolimus-eluting stents [EES; n = 2,229]) and the BP-DES group (n = 602; biolimus-eluting stents [BES]). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (re-MI), or any repeat revascularization. The secondary endpoint was the occurrence of stent thrombosis (ST).The 2-year adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of MACEs for ZES versus EES, ZES versus BES, EES versus BES, and ZES/EES versus BES (aHR: 1.125; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.834-1.518; P = 0.440) were similar. The cumulative incidence of ST was also comparable between the DP-DES and BP-DES groups (aHR: 1.407; 95% CI, 0.476-4.158; P = 0.537). Moreover, the 2-year aHRs of all-cause death, CD, re-MI, target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and non-TVR were similar.Patients with AMI and prediabetes who received DP-DES or BP-DES during PCI showed comparable safety and efficacy during the 2-year follow-up period.
高血糖是急性心肌梗死(AMI)患者临床预后不良的重要危险因素。在AMI合并糖尿病前期患者成功进行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后,基于耐用聚合物(DP)和可生物降解聚合物(BP)的新一代药物洗脱支架(DES)在长期临床预后方面的相对优势尚未明确确立。我们比较了此类患者中基于DP的新一代DES和基于BP的新一代DES的临床预后。
总共4377例AMI合并糖尿病前期患者被分为以下两组:DP-DES组(n = 3775;佐他莫司洗脱支架[ZES;n = 1546]和依维莫司洗脱支架[EES;n = 2229])和BP-DES组(n = 602;生物可吸收依维莫司洗脱支架[BES])。主要终点是主要不良心脏事件(MACE)的发生,定义为全因死亡、复发性心肌梗死(re-MI)或任何再次血运重建。次要终点是支架血栓形成(ST)的发生。
ZES与EES、ZES与BES、EES与BES以及ZES/EES与BES的MACE的2年调整风险比(aHR)(aHR:1.125;95%置信区间[CI],0.834 - 1.518;P = 0.440)相似。DP-DES组和BP-DES组之间ST的累积发生率也相当(aHR:1.407;95%CI,0.476 - 4.158;P = 0.537)。此外,全因死亡、CD、re-MI、靶病变血运重建(TLR)、靶血管血运重建(TVR)和非TVR的2年aHR相似。
在PCI期间接受DP-DES或BP-DES的AMI合并糖尿病前期患者在2年随访期内显示出相当的安全性和疗效。