Suppr超能文献

八旬外周动脉疾病患者血管内介入治疗与手术血运重建的院内转归和趋势。

In-Hospital Outcomes and Trends of Endovascular Intervention vs Surgical Revascularization in Octogenarians With Peripheral Artery Disease.

机构信息

University of Texas Health Science Center, McGovern Medical School, Memorial Hermann Heart & Vascular Institute, Houston, Texas.

Cleveland Clinic, Medicine Institute, Cleveland, Ohio.

出版信息

Am J Cardiol. 2021 Apr 15;145:143-150. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.12.091. Epub 2021 Jan 15.

Abstract

It is unknown whether endovascular intervention (EVI) is associated with superior outcomes when compared with surgical revascularization in octogenarian. National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database was used to compare the outcomes of limb revascularization in octogenarians who had surgical revascularization versus EVI. The NIS database's information on PAD patients ≥80-year-old who underwent limb revascularization between 2002 and 2014 included 394,504 octogenarian patients, of which 184,926 underwent surgical revascularization (46.9%) and 209,578 underwent EVI (53.1%). Multivariate analysis was performed to examine in-hospital outcomes. Trend over time in limb revascularization utilization was examined using Cochrane-Armitage test. EVI group had lower odds of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.61 [95% CI: 0.58 to 0.63], myocardial infarction (aOR: 0.84 [95% CI: 0.81 to 0.87]), stroke (aOR: 0.93 [95% CI: 0.89 to 0.96]), acute kidney injury (aOR: 0.79 [95% CI: 0.77 to 0.81]), and limb amputation (aOR: 0.77 [95% CI: 0.74 to 0.79]) compared with surgical group (p < 0.001 for all). EVI group had higher risk of bleeding (aOR: 1.20 [95% CI: 1.18 to 1.23]) and vascular complications (3.2% vs 2.7%, aOR: 1.25 [95% CI: 1.19 to 1.30]) compared with surgical group (p < 0.001 for all). Within study period, EVI utilization increased in octogenarian patients from 2.6% to 8.9% (ptrend < 0.001); whereas use of surgical revascularization decreased from 11.6% to 5.2% (ptrend < 0.001). In conclusion, the utilization of EVI in octogenarians is increasing, and associated with lower risk of in-hospital mortality and adverse cardiovascular and limb outcomes as compared with surgical revascularization.

摘要

目前尚不清楚血管内介入(EVI)是否优于手术血运重建在 80 岁以上患者中的效果。本研究使用国家住院患者样本(NIS)数据库比较了 2002 年至 2014 年期间接受肢体血运重建的 80 岁以上患者中接受手术血运重建与 EVI 的治疗效果。NIS 数据库中记录了 394504 名年龄在 80 岁以上、接受过肢体血运重建的 PAD 患者,其中 184926 名患者接受了手术血运重建(46.9%),209578 名患者接受了 EVI(53.1%)。多变量分析用于检查住院期间的治疗效果。使用 Cochrane-Armitage 检验来检验肢体血运重建应用的时间趋势。EVI 组的住院死亡率(校正比值比[aOR]:0.61[95%CI:0.58 至 0.63])、心肌梗死(aOR:0.84[95%CI:0.81 至 0.87])、卒(aOR:0.93[95%CI:0.89 至 0.96])、急性肾损伤(aOR:0.79[95%CI:0.77 至 0.81])和肢体截肢(aOR:0.77[95%CI:0.74 至 0.79])的风险均低于手术组(所有 p 值均<0.001)。EVI 组的出血风险(aOR:1.20[95%CI:1.18 至 1.23])和血管并发症(3.2%比 2.7%,aOR:1.25[95%CI:1.19 至 1.30])的风险均高于手术组(所有 p 值均<0.001)。在研究期间,EVI 在 80 岁以上患者中的使用率从 2.6%增加到 8.9%(ptrend<0.001);而手术血运重建的使用率从 11.6%下降到 5.2%(ptrend<0.001)。总之,与手术血运重建相比,EVI 在 80 岁以上患者中的应用日益增加,且与较低的住院死亡率和不良心血管及肢体预后相关。

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