Suppr超能文献

射血分数降低的患者行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术的比较。

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with reduced ejection fraction.

机构信息

Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pa.

Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pa; Heart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pa.

出版信息

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2021 Mar;161(3):1022-1031.e5. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2020.06.159. Epub 2020 Sep 16.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate comparative outcomes for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with reduced ejection fraction.

METHODS

All patients from the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center from 2011 to 2018 who had reduced preoperative ejection fraction (<50%) and underwent CABG or PCI for coronary revascularization were included in this study. Patients were risk-adjusted with propensity matching (1:1) and primary outcomes included long-term survival, readmission, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE).

RESULTS

A total of 2000 patients were included in the current study, consisting of CABG (n = 1553) and PCI (n = 447) cohorts with a mean ejection fraction of 35% ± 9.53%. Propensity matching yielded a 1:1 match with 324 patients in each cohort, controlling for all baseline characteristics. Thirty-day mortality was similar for PCI versus CABG (6.2% vs 4.9%; P = .49). Overall mortality over the study follow-up period (median, 3.23 years; range, 1.83-4.98 years) was significantly higher for the PCI cohort (37.4% vs 21.3%; P < .001). Total hospital readmissions (24.1% vs 12.9%; P = .001), cardiac readmissions (20.4% vs 11.1%; P = .001), myocardial infarction event (7.7% vs 1.8%; P = .001), MACCE (41.4% vs 23.8%; P < .001), and repeat revascularization (6.5% vs 2.6%; P = .02) occurred more frequently in the PCI cohort. Freedom from MACCE at 1 year (74.4% vs 87.0%; P < .001) and 5 years (54.5% vs 74.0%; P < .001) was significantly lower for the PCI cohort. On multivariable cox regression analysis, CABG (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.44-0.73; P < .001) was significantly associated with improved survival. Prior liver disease, dialysis, diabetes, and peripheral artery disease were the most significant predictors of mortality. The cumulative incidence of hospital readmission was lower for the CABG cohort (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.71; P < .001). Multivariable cox regression for MACCE (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.39-0.58; P < .001) showed significantly fewer events for the CABG cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with reduced ejection fraction who underwent CABG had significantly improved survival, lower MACCE, and fewer repeat revascularization procedures compared with patients who underwent PCI.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估射血分数降低的患者行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)与冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的对比结果。

方法

纳入 2011 年至 2018 年在匹兹堡大学医学中心接受 CABG 或 PCI 冠状动脉血运重建且术前射血分数降低(<50%)的所有患者。采用倾向匹配(1:1)对患者进行风险调整,主要结局包括长期生存、再入院和主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE)。

结果

本研究共纳入 2000 例患者,CABG 组(n=1553)和 PCI 组(n=447)的平均射血分数分别为 35%±9.53%。倾向匹配后每组各有 324 例患者,两组基线特征均得到了控制。PCI 组与 CABG 组的 30 天死亡率相似(6.2% vs 4.9%;P=.49)。在研究随访期间(中位数,3.23 年;范围,1.83-4.98 年),PCI 组的总死亡率明显更高(37.4% vs 21.3%;P<.001)。PCI 组的总住院再入院率(24.1% vs 12.9%;P=.001)、心脏再入院率(20.4% vs 11.1%;P=.001)、心肌梗死事件(7.7% vs 1.8%;P=.001)、MACCE(41.4% vs 23.8%;P<.001)和再次血运重建率(6.5% vs 2.6%;P=.02)更高。PCI 组的 1 年(74.4% vs 87.0%;P<.001)和 5 年(54.5% vs 74.0%;P<.001)MACCE 无事件生存率明显较低。多变量 Cox 回归分析显示,CABG(风险比,0.57;95%置信区间,0.44-0.73;P<.001)与生存率提高显著相关。既往肝脏疾病、透析、糖尿病和外周动脉疾病是死亡率的最显著预测因素。CABG 组的累积住院再入院率较低(风险比,0.51;95%置信区间,0.37-0.71;P<.001)。MACCE 的多变量 Cox 回归(风险比,0.48;95%置信区间,0.39-0.58;P<.001)显示 CABG 组的事件明显较少。

结论

与接受 PCI 的患者相比,射血分数降低的患者行 CABG 治疗后生存显著改善,MACCE 发生率更低,再次血运重建术更少。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验