Niimi Nozomi, Sawano Mitsuaki, Ikemura Nobuhiro, Nagai Toshiyuki, Nakano Shintaro, Shoji Satoshi, Shiraishi Yasuyuki, Ueda Ikuko, Numasawa Yohei, Suzuki Masahiro, Noma Shigetaka, Fukuda Keiichi, Kohsaka Shun
Department of Cardiology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo 160-8582, Japan.
Department of Cardiology, Tokyo Dental College Ichikawa General Hospital, Chiba Prefecture 272-8513, Japan.
J Clin Med. 2020 Sep 7;9(9):2889. doi: 10.3390/jcm9092889.
In the International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA) trial, an early invasive strategy did not decrease mortality compared to a conservative strategy for stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) patients with moderate-to-severe ischemia, and the role of revascularization would be revised. However, the applicability and potential influence of this trial in daily practice remains unclear. Our objective was to assess the eligibility and representativeness of the ISCHEMIA trial on the patients with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). From a multicenter registry, we extracted a consecutive 13,223 SIHD patients with PCI (baseline cohort). We applied ISCHEMIA eligibility criteria and compared the baseline characteristics between the eligible patients and the actual study participants (randomized controlled trial (RCT) patients). In 3463 patients with follow-up information (follow-up cohort), the 2 year composite of major adverse cardiac events was evaluated between the eligible patients and RCT patients, as well as eligible and non-eligible patients in the registry. In the baseline cohort, 77.3% of SIHD patients with moderate-to-severe ischemia were eligible for the ISCHEMIA. They were comparable with RCT patients for baseline characteristics and outcomes unlike the non-eligible patients. In conclusion, the trial results seem applicable for the majority of PCI patients with moderate-to-severe ischemia except for the non-eligible patients.
在国际医学与侵入性方法比较健康效果研究(ISCHEMIA)试验中,对于中度至重度缺血的稳定型缺血性心脏病(SIHD)患者,与保守策略相比,早期侵入性策略并未降低死亡率,血管重建的作用将被重新审视。然而,该试验在日常实践中的适用性和潜在影响仍不明确。我们的目的是评估ISCHEMIA试验对接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)患者的入选资格和代表性。从一个多中心登记处,我们提取了连续13223例接受PCI的SIHD患者(基线队列)。我们应用ISCHEMIA入选标准,并比较了符合条件的患者与实际研究参与者(随机对照试验(RCT)患者)之间的基线特征。在3463例有随访信息的患者(随访队列)中,评估了符合条件的患者与RCT患者之间以及登记处中符合条件和不符合条件的患者之间2年主要不良心脏事件的复合情况。在基线队列中,77.3%的中度至重度缺血的SIHD患者符合ISCHEMIA试验的入选标准。与不符合条件的患者不同,他们在基线特征和结局方面与RCT患者具有可比性。总之,除了不符合条件的患者外,该试验结果似乎适用于大多数中度至重度缺血的PCI患者。