Li Dongdong, Liu Hao, Gao Chuncheng, Liu Jing, Liu Pengyun, Cheng Miaomiao, Zheng Qiangsun, Deng Jie, Zhang Mingming, Luo Zhonghua, Guo Wangang
Department of Cardiology, Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University, 710038 Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Department of Cardiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, 710004 Xi'an, Shaanxi, China.
Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2023 Jul 31;24(8):216. doi: 10.31083/j.rcm2408216. eCollection 2023 Aug.
Provisional stenting is the preferred strategy for non-left main bifurcation lesions. However, its superiority over planned double stenting for unprotected left main distal bifurcation (UPLMB) lesions remains unclear. Previous studies have reported conflicting results.
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing the outcomes of provisional stenting to planned double stenting for UPLMB lesions were identified. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE). The secondary endpoints were myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularisation (TVR), target lesion revascularisation (TLR), all-cause death, cardiac death and stent thrombosis (ST). Aggregated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. A sensitivity analysis was conducted if was 50% or 0.01. Publication bias analysis was considered if more than 10 studies were enrolled.
Two RCTs and 19 observational studies comprising 11,672 patients were enrolled. Provisional stenting had a significantly lower incidence of MACE, mainly driven by TLR and TVR. Double stenting had a significantly lower incidence of cardiac death. In addition, patients undergoing provisional stenting had a lower tendency towards the occurrence of MI, while patients undergoing double stenting had a lower tendency towards all-cause death and ST.
A provisional stenting strategy was associated with lower MACE, TVR and TLR but higher cardiac death. Further investigation is needed through RCTs to assess which strategy performs better.
临时支架置入术是非左主干分叉病变的首选策略。然而,其相对于计划性双支架置入术治疗无保护左主干远端分叉(UPLMB)病变的优势仍不明确。既往研究报告的结果相互矛盾。
检索比较UPLMB病变临时支架置入术与计划性双支架置入术疗效的随机对照试验(RCT)和观察性研究。主要终点是主要不良心脏事件(MACE)。次要终点是心肌梗死(MI)、靶血管血运重建(TVR)、靶病变血运重建(TLR)、全因死亡、心源性死亡和支架血栓形成(ST)。计算汇总比值比(OR)和95%置信区间。如果I²≥50%或P≤0.01,则进行敏感性分析。如果纳入研究超过10项,则考虑发表偏倚分析。
纳入两项RCT和19项观察性研究,共11672例患者。临时支架置入术的MACE发生率显著较低,主要由TLR和TVR驱动。双支架置入术的心源性死亡发生率显著较低。此外,接受临时支架置入术的患者发生MI的倾向较低,而接受双支架置入术的患者全因死亡和ST的倾向较低。
临时支架置入术策略与较低的MACE、TVR和TLR相关,但心源性死亡较高。需要通过RCT进一步研究以评估哪种策略效果更佳。