Suppr超能文献

多支冠状动脉疾病的杂交冠状动脉血运重建与冠状动脉旁路移植术的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Hybrid coronary revascularization versus coronary artery bypass grafting for multivessel coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Bristol Medical School, Public Health Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

Bristol Medical School, Translational Health Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.

出版信息

Int J Cardiol. 2022 Jul 15;359:20-27. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2022.04.030. Epub 2022 Apr 13.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines the benefits of a left internal mammary artery to left anterior descending artery anastomosis, via a mini thoracotomy, with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for other diseased coronaries.

AIMS

The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of HCR with those of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for multi-vessel coronary artery disease (MCAD).

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis with a primary outcome of short-term mortality and secondary outcomes of mid-term survival, length of hospital stay, stroke, renal failure and mid-term MACE rate.

RESULTS

3399 patients (HCR = 1164, CABG = 2235) were included, with no significant difference in short-term mortality between groups (OR = 1.50, 95% CI = [0.90,2.49], p = 0.11), although a higher mortality rate was seen in the HCR group (0.73% vs 0.64%). The average length of stay in intensive care unit was significantly shorter following HCR than CABG (mean difference = -15.52 h, CI = [-22.47,-8.59], p˂0.001) and overall hospital stay was also shorter in this group, although not statistically significant (mean difference = -3.15 days, 95% CI = [-6.55, 0.25], p = 0.07). HCR was associated with a reduced odds of blood transfusion (OR = 0.34, 95% CI = [0.22,0.54], p < 0.001). There was not a significant difference in mid-term survival (OR = 0.86, 95% CI = [0.62,1.21], p = 0.39) or MACE rate (OR = 0.82, 95% CI = [0.55,1.23], p = 0.34). No differences were found between HCR and CABG for post-operative stroke (OR = 1.36, 95% CI = [0.87, 2.13], p = 0.16) or renal failure (OR = 0.71, 95% CI = [0.43,1.16], p = 0.14).

CONCLUSIONS

HCR has a higher incidence of short-term mortality compared to CABG in patients with MCAD, although this difference is not statistically significant. Similar rates of mid-term survival and other short term post-operative complications were found between the two groups. HCR has a shorter ICU stays and reduced requirement for blood transfusion.

摘要

背景

杂交冠状动脉血运重建(HCR)结合了经小切口左内乳动脉至前降支吻合术的优势,以及经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)治疗其他病变冠状动脉。

目的

本荟萃分析旨在比较 HCR 与冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)治疗多支血管冠状动脉疾病(MCAD)的短期和长期结局。

方法

我们进行了荟萃分析,主要结局为短期死亡率,次要结局为中期生存率、住院时间、卒中、肾功能衰竭和中期主要心脏不良事件(MACE)发生率。

结果

共纳入 3399 例患者(HCR=1164 例,CABG=2235 例),两组短期死亡率无显著差异(OR=1.50,95%CI=[0.90,2.49],p=0.11),但 HCR 组死亡率略高(0.73% vs 0.64%)。与 CABG 相比,HCR 组患者重症监护病房(ICU)的平均住院时间明显缩短(平均差异=-15.52 h,CI=-22.47,-8.59,p˂0.001),整体住院时间也缩短,但无统计学意义(平均差异=-3.15 天,95%CI=-6.55,0.25,p=0.07)。HCR 与输血几率降低相关(OR=0.34,95%CI=[0.22,0.54],p˂0.001)。中期生存率(OR=0.86,95%CI=[0.62,1.21],p=0.39)或 MACE 发生率(OR=0.82,95%CI=[0.55,1.23],p=0.34)无显著差异。HCR 与 CABG 术后卒中(OR=1.36,95%CI=[0.87,2.13],p=0.16)或肾功能衰竭(OR=0.71,95%CI=[0.43,1.16],p=0.14)发生率无差异。

结论

与 CABG 相比,HCR 治疗 MCAD 患者的短期死亡率更高,但差异无统计学意义。两组中期生存率和其他短期术后并发症发生率相似。HCR 患者 ICU 住院时间更短,输血需求减少。

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