Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Heart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2021;33(2):368-377. doi: 10.1053/j.semtcvs.2020.07.003. Epub 2020 Jul 24.
As percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) continues to evolve, comparative outcomes for PCI vs coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remain relevant in diabetic patients. All revascularization procedures in patients with coronary artery disease and diabetes mellitus from 2010 to 2018 were included. Propensity matching was used to identify equivalent cohorts to compare revascularization strategies. Primary outcomes included 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year mortality. Multivariable analysis was used to define factors associated with major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). A total of 2869 patients with diabetes were divided into PCI (n = 653) and CABG (n = 2216) cohorts. Propensity matching yielded a 1:1 match consisting of 552 patients in each cohort (CABG vs PCI). Total median follow-up was 3.28 years (range: 1.83-5.00). Following propensity matching in patients with no prior PCI (1:1; n = 279), mortality remained significantly higher in the PCI cohort at 1 year (13.98% vs 7.53%; P = 0.014) and 5 years (26.88% vs 16.85%; P < 0.004). Hospital readmissions were higher for PCI patients at 1 year (16.49% vs 9.32%; P < 0.0122) and 5 years (19.71% vs 11.83%; P = 0.011). MACCE occurred more frequently in the PCI cohort (32.97% vs 21.51%; P = 0.002). Need for subsequent revascularization (6.45% vs 2.51%; P = 0.024) were significantly higher in the PCI cohort, and time interval to revascularization was significantly longer in the CABG cohort (3.48 [2.11-5.17] vs 2.62 [1.33-4.25] years; P < 0.001). The current study reports improved survival, fewer long-term hospital readmissions, and reduced MACCE and need for repeat revascularization in the CABG cohort. Given these data, patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease may fare better with surgical revascularization, compared to PCI.
随着经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的不断发展,糖尿病患者的 PCI 与冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的比较结果仍然具有重要意义。纳入了 2010 年至 2018 年所有患有冠状动脉疾病和糖尿病的患者的血管重建手术。采用倾向匹配法识别等效队列以比较血管重建策略。主要结局包括 30 天、1 年和 5 年死亡率。多变量分析用于确定与主要不良心血管和脑血管事件(MACCE)相关的因素。共有 2869 名糖尿病患者分为 PCI(n=653)和 CABG(n=2216)两组。倾向匹配产生了 1:1 的匹配,每组 552 名患者(CABG 与 PCI)。中位总随访时间为 3.28 年(范围:1.83-5.00)。在无既往 PCI 的患者中进行倾向匹配(1:1;n=279)后,1 年(13.98%比 7.53%;P=0.014)和 5 年(26.88%比 16.85%;P<0.004)时 PCI 组的死亡率仍显著更高。1 年(16.49%比 9.32%;P<0.0122)和 5 年(19.71%比 11.83%;P=0.011)时 PCI 组的医院再入院率更高。PCI 组的 MACCE 更常见(32.97%比 21.51%;P=0.002)。需要再次血运重建的比例(6.45%比 2.51%;P=0.024)在 PCI 组中明显更高,而 CABG 组的血运重建时间间隔明显更长(3.48[2.11-5.17]比 2.62[1.33-4.25]年;P<0.001)。本研究报告 CABG 组的生存率提高、长期住院再入院率降低、MACCE 和再次血运重建的需要减少。鉴于这些数据,与 PCI 相比,患有糖尿病和冠状动脉疾病的患者可能通过手术血运重建获得更好的效果。