Suppr超能文献

真实世界中经皮冠状动脉介入治疗保护左主干冠状动脉疾病与未保护左主干冠状动脉疾病的经验和结局:来自退伍军人事务临床评估报告和跟踪计划的见解。

Real-World Experience and Outcomes With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Protected Versus Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Insights from the Veteran Affairs Clinical Assessment Reporting and Tracking Program.

机构信息

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas.

Veterans Affairs Eastern Colorado Health Care System, Aurora, Colorado; CART Program, Office of Quality and Patient Safety, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, District of Columbia.

出版信息

Am J Cardiol. 2024 Jul 1;222:39-50. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2024.04.039. Epub 2024 Apr 26.

Abstract

The practice patterns and outcomes of protected left main (PLM) and unprotected left main (ULM) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are not well defined in contemporary US clinical practice. Data were collected from all Veteran Affairs catheterization laboratories participating in the Clinical Assessment Reporting and Tracking Program between 2009 and 2019. The analysis included 4,351 patients who underwent left main PCI, of whom 1,306 pairs of PLM and ULM PCI were included in a propensity-matched cohort. Selected temporal trends were also assessed. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) outcomes at 1 year, which was defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, rehospitalization for myocardial infarction (MI), rehospitalization for stroke, or urgent revascularization. Patients who underwent ULM PCI compared with patients who underwent PLM PCI were older (age 71.5 vs 69.2 years, p <0.001), more clinically complex, and more likely to present with acute coronary syndrome. In the propensity-matched cohort, radial access was used more often for ULM PCI (21% [273] vs 14% [185], p <0.001) and ULM PCI was more likely to involve the left main bifurcation (22% vs 14%, p = 0.003) and require mechanical circulatory support (10% [134] vs 1% [17], p <0.001). The 1-year MACEs occurred more frequently with ULM PCI than PLM PCI (22% [289] vs 16% [215], p ≤0.001) and all-cause mortality was also higher (16% [213] vs 10% [125], p ≤0.001). In the matched cohort, there was a low incidence of rehospitalization for MI (4% [48] ULM vs 4% [48] PLM, p = 1.000) or revascularization (7% [94] ULM vs 6% [84] PLM, p = 0.485). In this real-world experience, patients who underwent PLM PCI had better 1-year outcomes than those who underwent ULM PCI; however, in both groups, there was a high rate of mortality and MACEs at 1 year despite a relatively low rate of MI or revascularization.

摘要

在当代美国临床实践中,保护左主干(PLM)和非保护左主干(ULM)经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的实践模式和结果尚不清楚。数据来自于 2009 年至 2019 年期间参与临床评估报告和跟踪计划的所有退伍军人事务导管实验室。分析包括 4351 例接受左主干 PCI 的患者,其中 1306 对 PLM 和 ULM PCI 纳入倾向匹配队列。还评估了选定的时间趋势。主要结局为 1 年时的主要不良心血管事件(MACE)结局,定义为全因死亡率、因心肌梗死(MI)再住院、因中风再住院或紧急血运重建的复合结局。与接受 PLM PCI 的患者相比,接受 ULM PCI 的患者年龄更大(71.5 岁 vs. 69.2 岁,p <0.001),临床情况更复杂,更有可能出现急性冠状动脉综合征。在倾向匹配队列中,桡动脉入路更常用于 ULM PCI(21%[273] vs. 14%[185],p <0.001),并且 ULM PCI 更可能涉及左主干分叉(22% vs. 14%,p = 0.003)并需要机械循环支持(10%[134] vs. 1%[17],p <0.001)。与 PLM PCI 相比,接受 ULM PCI 的患者 1 年时的 MACE 发生率更高(22%[289] vs. 16%[215],p ≤0.001),全因死亡率也更高(16%[213] vs. 10%[125],p ≤0.001)。在匹配队列中,再发 MI(4%[48]ULM 与 4%[48]PLM,p = 1.000)或血运重建(7%[94]ULM 与 6%[84]PLM,p = 0.485)的再住院率较低。在这项真实世界的经验中,接受 PLM PCI 的患者 1 年预后优于接受 ULM PCI 的患者;然而,在两组中,尽管 MI 或血运重建的发生率相对较低,但 1 年时死亡率和 MACE 发生率均较高。

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