• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

对于既往行冠状动脉旁路移植术和复发性心肌缺血的患者,旁路移植血管或原生冠状动脉的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗如何?一项 5 年随访队列研究。

For patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting and recurrent myocardial ischemia, percutaneous coronary intervention on bypass graft or native coronary artery?-A 5-year follow-up cohort study.

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Fuwai Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.

Department of Respiratory and Pulmonary Vascular Disease, Fuwai Yunnan Cardiovascular Hospital, Kunming, China.

出版信息

Clin Cardiol. 2023 Jun;46(6):680-688. doi: 10.1002/clc.24021. Epub 2023 Apr 28.

DOI:10.1002/clc.24021
PMID:37114396
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10270251/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Real-world data on target vessel of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was still limited.

HYPOTHESIS

A prospective cohort was examined to determine the frequency and outcomes of native coronary artery PCI versus bypass graft PCI in patients with prior CABG.

METHODS

A large-sample observational study enrolled a total of 10 724 patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) underwent PCI in 2013. Two- and five-year clinical outcomes were compared between graft PCI group and native artery PCI group in patients with prior CABG.

RESULTS

A total of 438 cases had CABG history in the total cohort. Graft PCI group and native artery PCI group accounted for 13.7% and 86.3%, respectively. The rates of 2- and 5-year all-cause death and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebral events (MACCE) showed no significant difference between the two groups (p > .05). Two-year revascularization risk was lower in graft PCI group than native artery PCI group (3.3% and 12.4%, p < .05), but 5-year myocardial infarction (MI) risk was higher (13.3% and 5.0%, p < .05). In multivariate COX regression models, graft PCI group was independently associated with lower 2-year revascularization risk (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.05-0.88; p = .033), but higher 5-year MI risk than native artery PCI group (HR: 2.61; 95% CI: 1.03-6.57; p = .042). Five-year all-cause death and MACCE risk showed no difference between the two groups in model.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with prior CABG underwent PCI, patients in graft PCI group had higher 5-year MI risk than patients received native artery PCI. But, 5-year mortality and MACCE was not significantly different between graft PCI group and native artery PCI group.

摘要

背景

经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)治疗既往冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)患者的靶血管的真实世界数据仍有限。

假说

本前瞻性队列研究旨在确定既往 CABG 患者中,行原位冠状动脉 PCI 与行旁路移植血管 PCI 的频率和结局。

方法

对 2013 年行 PCI 的共 10724 例冠心病患者进行了一项大型样本观察性研究。比较了既往 CABG 患者中,旁路移植血管 PCI 组和原位动脉 PCI 组的 2 年和 5 年临床结局。

结果

总队列中共有 438 例有 CABG 病史。旁路移植血管 PCI 组和原位动脉 PCI 组分别占 13.7%和 86.3%。两组的 2 年和 5 年全因死亡和主要不良心血管和脑事件(MACCE)发生率无显著差异(p>0.05)。2 年血运重建风险在旁路移植血管 PCI 组低于原位动脉 PCI 组(3.3%和 12.4%,p<0.05),但 5 年心肌梗死(MI)风险较高(13.3%和 5.0%,p<0.05)。多变量 COX 回归模型显示,旁路移植血管 PCI 组独立与 2 年血运重建风险较低相关(风险比 [HR]:0.21;95%置信区间 [CI]:0.05-0.88;p=0.033),但与原位动脉 PCI 组相比,5 年 MI 风险较高(HR:2.61;95% CI:1.03-6.57;p=0.042)。在模型中,两组 5 年全因死亡和 MACCE 风险无差异。

结论

在既往 CABG 行 PCI 的患者中,旁路移植血管 PCI 组患者的 5 年 MI 风险高于行原位动脉 PCI 者。但旁路移植血管 PCI 组与原位动脉 PCI 组的 5 年死亡率和 MACCE 无显著差异。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/67a6/10270251/f97c7ef93060/CLC-46-680-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/67a6/10270251/f97c7ef93060/CLC-46-680-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/67a6/10270251/f97c7ef93060/CLC-46-680-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
For patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting and recurrent myocardial ischemia, percutaneous coronary intervention on bypass graft or native coronary artery?-A 5-year follow-up cohort study.对于既往行冠状动脉旁路移植术和复发性心肌缺血的患者,旁路移植血管或原生冠状动脉的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗如何?一项 5 年随访队列研究。
Clin Cardiol. 2023 Jun;46(6):680-688. doi: 10.1002/clc.24021. Epub 2023 Apr 28.
2
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Native Coronary Arteries Versus Bypass Grafts in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking Program.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗在既往冠状动脉旁路移植术患者中的应用:来自退伍军人事务部临床评估、报告和跟踪计划的见解。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016 May 9;9(9):884-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.01.034. Epub 2016 Apr 13.
3
Long-term Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.
Heart Surg Forum. 2022 Mar 24;25(2):E232-E240. doi: 10.1532/hsf.4457.
4
[Comparison on the long-term outcomes post percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting for bifurcation lesions in unprotected left main coronary artery].[经皮冠状动脉介入治疗或冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗无保护左主干冠状动脉分叉病变的长期预后比较]
Zhonghua Xin Xue Guan Bing Za Zhi. 2017 Jan 25;45(1):19-25. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-3758.2017.01.005.
5
One-year outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention in native coronary arteries versus saphenous vein grafts in patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗在既往冠状动脉旁路移植术患者中的原生冠状动脉与隐静脉桥中的 1 年结果。
Cardiol J. 2022;29(3):396-404. doi: 10.5603/CJ.a2020.0131. Epub 2020 Oct 1.
6
[Efficacy comparison of 3 strategies for real-world stable coronary artery disease patients with three-vessel disease].[三种策略对真实世界中三支血管病变稳定型冠心病患者的疗效比较]
Zhonghua Xin Xue Guan Bing Za Zhi. 2017 Dec 24;45(12):1049-1057. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-3758.2017.12.009.
7
Comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention of native coronary artery versus bypass graft in patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting.既往接受冠状动脉旁路移植术患者的自身冠状动脉经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术的比较。
J Thorac Dis. 2023 Oct 31;15(10):5371-5385. doi: 10.21037/jtd-23-473. Epub 2023 Sep 11.
8
Meta-analysis Comparing Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Native Artery Versus Bypass Graft in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与旁路移植术治疗冠状动脉旁路移植术后患者的疗效比较的荟萃分析。
Am J Cardiol. 2021 Feb 1;140:47-54. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.10.062. Epub 2020 Nov 2.
9
Coronary artery bypass grafting vs. percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with three-vessel disease: final five-year follow-up of the SYNTAX trial.冠状动脉旁路移植术与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗对三血管病变患者的比较:SYNTAX 试验的最终五年随访结果。
Eur Heart J. 2014 Oct 21;35(40):2821-30. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu213. Epub 2014 May 21.
10
Native coronary artery or bypass graft percutaneous coronary intervention in patients after previous coronary artery bypass surgery: A large nationwide analysis from the Netherlands Heart Registration.既往冠状动脉旁路移植术后患者行冠状动脉内 native 冠状动脉或旁路移植血管经皮冠状动脉介入治疗:荷兰心脏注册登记的一项大型全国性分析。
Int J Cardiol. 2024 Jun 15;405:131974. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2024.131974. Epub 2024 Mar 15.

引用本文的文献

1
BMSC‑derived exosome‑mediated miR‑25‑3p delivery protects against myocardial ischemia/reperfusion injury by constraining M1‑like macrophage polarization.骨髓间充质干细胞衍生的外泌体介导的 miR-25-3p 传递通过限制 M1 样巨噬细胞极化来保护心肌免受缺血/再灌注损伤。
Mol Med Rep. 2024 Aug;30(2). doi: 10.3892/mmr.2024.13266. Epub 2024 Jun 21.

本文引用的文献

1
Quality of Life After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in No-Touch Saphenous Vein Grafts is Significantly Better Than in Conventional Vein Grafts.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗无接触隐静脉移植物的生活质量明显优于传统静脉移植物。
Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2022 Aug 16;37(4):430-438. doi: 10.21470/1678-9741-2021-0576.
2
2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.2021年美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会/心血管造影和介入学会冠状动脉血运重建指南:美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会临床实践指南联合委员会报告
Circulation. 2022 Jan 18;145(3):e18-e114. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000001038. Epub 2021 Dec 9.
3
The "No-touch" Harvesting Technique Revives the Position of the Saphenous Vein as an Important Conduit in CABG Surgery: 30-year Anniversary.
“非接触式”采集技术使大隐静脉在冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)中作为重要血管 conduit 的地位得以复兴:30 周年纪念 。 (注:这里“conduit”直译为“管道”,结合医学语境可能是指血管通道之类的意思,具体准确含义需结合更详细的医学背景确定,但按要求不添加解释)
Braz J Cardiovasc Surg. 2021 Oct 17;36(5):I-III. doi: 10.21470/1678-9741-2021-0959.
4
Contemporary coronary artery bypass graft surgery and subsequent percutaneous revascularization.当代冠状动脉旁路移植术及后续的经皮血运重建术。
Nat Rev Cardiol. 2022 Mar;19(3):195-208. doi: 10.1038/s41569-021-00612-6. Epub 2021 Oct 5.
5
Trends of repeat revascularization choice in patients with prior coronary artery bypass surgery.既往冠状动脉旁路移植术后患者再次血运重建选择的趋势。
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Sep;98(3):470-480. doi: 10.1002/ccd.29234. Epub 2020 Sep 5.
6
China Tongxinluo Study for myocardial protection in patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction (CTS-AMI): Rationale and design of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial.中国通心络对急性心肌梗死患者心肌保护作用的研究(CTS-AMI):一项随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、多中心临床试验的原理和设计。
Am Heart J. 2020 Sep;227:47-55. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2020.06.011. Epub 2020 Jun 20.
7
Diabetics have Inferior Long-Term Survival and Quality of Life after CABG.糖尿病患者冠状动脉旁路移植术后长期生存率及生活质量较差。
Int J Angiol. 2019 Mar;28(1):50-56. doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1676791. Epub 2019 Jan 2.
8
[2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization].[2018年欧洲心脏病学会/欧洲心胸外科学会心肌血运重建指南]
Kardiol Pol. 2018;76(12):1585-1664. doi: 10.5603/KP.2018.0228.
9
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Saphenous Vein Graft.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的隐静脉桥。
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017 May;10(5). doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.117.004953.
10
Long-Term Follow-Up of Patients With Previous Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion.曾接受冠状动脉旁路移植术的患者因慢性完全闭塞病变接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的长期随访
Am J Cardiol. 2016 Dec 1;118(11):1641-1646. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.08.038. Epub 2016 Aug 31.