• 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

经导管主动脉瓣植入术与血流储备分数引导的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗对比传统外科主动脉瓣置换术与冠状动脉搭桥术治疗主动脉瓣狭窄合并复杂或多支冠状动脉疾病患者(TCW):一项国际、多中心、前瞻性、开放标签、非劣效性随机对照试验。

TransCatheter aortic valve implantation and fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention versus conventional surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary bypass grafting for treatment of patients with aortic valve stenosis and complex or multivessel coronary disease (TCW): an international, multicentre, prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial.

作者信息

Kedhi Elvin, Hermanides Renicus S, Dambrink Jan-Henk E, Singh Sandeep K, Ten Berg Jurriën M, van Ginkel DirkJan, Hudec Martin, Amoroso Giovanni, Amat-Santos Ignacio J, Andreas Martin, Campante Teles Rui, Bonnet Guillaume, Van Belle Eric, Conradi Lenard, van Garsse Leen, Wojakowski Wojtek, Voudris Vassilis, Sacha Jerzy, Cervinka Pavel, Lipsic Erik, Somi Samer, Nombela-Franco Luis, Postma Sonja, Piayda Kerstin, De Luca Giuseppe, Kolkman Evelien, Malinowski Krzysztof P, Modine Thomas

机构信息

Royal Victoria Hospital, McGill University Health Center, Montreal, QC, Canada; Department of Cardiology and Structural Heart Disease, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.

Department of Cardiology, Isala Heart Center, Zwolle, Netherlands.

出版信息

Lancet. 2025 Dec 21;404(10471):2593-2602. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(24)02100-7. Epub 2024 Dec 4.

DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(24)02100-7
PMID:39644913
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe aortic stenosis present frequently (∼50%) with concomitant obstructive coronary artery disease. Current guidelines recommend combined surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) as the preferred treatment. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) represent a valid treatment alternative. We aimed to test the non-inferiority of FFR-guided PCI plus TAVI versus SAVR plus CABG in patients with severe aortic stenosis and complex coronary artery disease.

METHODS

This international, multicentre, prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial was conducted at 18 tertiary medical centres across Europe. Patients (aged ≥70 years) with severe aortic stenosis and complex coronary artery disease, deemed feasible for percutaneous or surgical treatment according to the on-site Heart Team, were randomly assigned (1:1) to FFR-guided PCI plus TAVI or SAVR plus CABG according to a computer-generated sequence with random permuted blocks sizes stratified by site. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, disabling stroke, clinically driven target-vessel revascularisation, valve reintervention, and life-threatening or disabling bleeding at 1 year post-treatment. The trial was powered for non-inferiority (with a margin of 15%) and if met, for superiority. The primary and safety analyses were done per an intention-to-treat principle. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03424941) and is closed.

FINDINGS

Between May 31, 2018, and June 30, 2023, 172 patients were enrolled, of whom 91 were assigned to the FFR-guided PCI plus TAVI group and 81 to the SAVR plus CABG group. The mean age of patients was 76·5 years (SD 3·9). 118 (69%) of 172 patients were male and 54 (31%) patients were female. FFR-guided PCI plus TAVI resulted in favourable outcomes for the primary endpoint (four [4%] of 91 patients) versus SAVR plus CABG (17 [23%] of 77 patients; risk difference -18·5 [90% CI -27·8 to -9·7]), which was below the 15% prespecified non-inferiority margin (p<0·001). FFR-guided PCI plus TAVI was superior to SAVR plus CABG (hazard ratio 0·17 [95% CI 0·06-0·51]; p<0·001), which was driven mainly by all-cause mortality (none [0%] of 91 patients vs seven (10%) of 77 patients; p=0·0025) and life-threatening bleeding (two [2%] vs nine [12%]; p=0·010).

INTERPRETATION

The TCW trial is the first trial to compare percutaneous treatment versus surgical treatment in patients with severe aortic stenosis and complex coronary artery disease, showing favourable primary endpoint and mortality outcomes with percutaneous treatment.

FUNDING

Isala Heart Centre and Medtronic.

摘要

背景

重度主动脉瓣狭窄患者常伴有阻塞性冠状动脉疾病(发生率约为50%)。当前指南推荐联合外科主动脉瓣置换术(SAVR)和冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)作为首选治疗方案。经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)和基于血流储备分数(FFR)指导的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)是一种有效的替代治疗方法。我们旨在检验在重度主动脉瓣狭窄合并复杂冠状动脉疾病患者中,FFR指导的PCI联合TAVI对比SAVR联合CABG的非劣效性。

方法

这项国际多中心前瞻性开放标签非劣效性随机对照试验在欧洲18家三级医疗中心开展。根据现场心脏团队评估,认为适合经皮或外科治疗的重度主动脉瓣狭窄合并复杂冠状动脉疾病患者(年龄≥70岁),按照计算机生成的序列,采用随机排列的区组大小并按地点分层,随机分配(1:1)至FFR指导的PCI联合TAVI组或SAVR联合CABG组。主要终点是治疗后1年全因死亡、心肌梗死、致残性卒中、临床驱动的靶血管血运重建、瓣膜再次干预以及危及生命或致残性出血的复合终点。该试验设定了非劣效性检验(界值为15%),若达到非劣效性,则进行优效性检验。主要分析和安全性分析按照意向性分析原则进行。本试验已在ClinicalTrials.gov注册(NCT03424941),现已结束。

结果

在2018年5月31日至2023年6月30日期间,共纳入172例患者,其中91例被分配至FFR指导的PCI联合TAVI组,81例被分配至SAVR联合CABG组。患者的平均年龄为76.5岁(标准差3.9)。172例患者中,118例(69%)为男性,54例(31%)为女性。FFR指导的PCI联合TAVI组主要终点的结果优于SAVR联合CABG组(91例患者中有4例[4%])对比(77例患者中有17例[23%];风险差异为-18.5[90%CI -27.8至-9.7]),低于预先设定的15%非劣效性界值(p<0.001)。FFR指导的PCI联合TAVI组优于SAVR联合CABG组(风险比0.17[95%CI 0.06 - 0.51];p<0.001),主要由全因死亡(91例患者中无[0%]对比77例患者中有7例[10%];p = 0.0025)和危及生命的出血(2例[2%]对比9例[12%];p = 0.010)导致。

解读

TCW试验是第一项比较重度主动脉瓣狭窄合并复杂冠状动脉疾病患者经皮治疗与外科治疗的试验,显示经皮治疗在主要终点和死亡率方面有良好结果。

资助

伊萨拉心脏中心和美敦力公司。

相似文献

1
TransCatheter aortic valve implantation and fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention versus conventional surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary bypass grafting for treatment of patients with aortic valve stenosis and complex or multivessel coronary disease (TCW): an international, multicentre, prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial.经导管主动脉瓣植入术与血流储备分数引导的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗对比传统外科主动脉瓣置换术与冠状动脉搭桥术治疗主动脉瓣狭窄合并复杂或多支冠状动脉疾病患者(TCW):一项国际、多中心、前瞻性、开放标签、非劣效性随机对照试验。
Lancet. 2025 Dec 21;404(10471):2593-2602. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(24)02100-7. Epub 2024 Dec 4.
2
TransCatheter aortic valve implantation and fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention versus conventional surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary bypass grafting for treatment of patients with aortic valve stenosis and multivessel or advanced coronary disease: The transcatheter valve and vessels trial (TCW trial): Design and rationale.经导管主动脉瓣植入术与血流储备分数引导的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗对比传统外科主动脉瓣置换术和冠状动脉搭桥术治疗主动脉瓣狭窄合并多支血管病变或晚期冠状动脉疾病患者:经导管瓣膜与血管试验(TCW试验):设计与原理
Am Heart J. 2024 Apr;270:86-94. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2024.01.010. Epub 2024 Feb 1.
3
Coronary revascularization during treatment of severe aortic stenosis: A meta-analysis of the complete percutaneous approach (PCI plus TAVR) versus the complete surgical approach (CABG plus SAVR).重度主动脉瓣狭窄治疗期间的冠状动脉血运重建:完全经皮入路(PCI加TAVR)与完全手术入路(CABG加SAVR)的荟萃分析
J Card Surg. 2020 Aug;35(8):2009-2016. doi: 10.1111/jocs.14814. Epub 2020 Jul 15.
4
Outcomes after fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting (FAME 3): 5-year follow-up of a multicentre, open-label, randomised trial.血流储备分数指导的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术的疗效比较(FAME 3):一项多中心、开放标签、随机试验的5年随访
Lancet. 2025 Apr 26;405(10488):1481-1490. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(25)00505-7. Epub 2025 Mar 30.
5
Trends and outcomes of combined percutaneous (TAVI+PCI) and surgical approach (SAVR+CABG) for patients with aortic valve and coronary artery disease: A National Readmission Database (NRD) analysis.主动脉瓣和冠状动脉疾病患者行经皮(TAVI+PCI)和外科联合治疗(SAVR+CABG)的趋势和结果:国家再入院数据库(NRD)分析。
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2023 Nov;102(5):946-957. doi: 10.1002/ccd.30832. Epub 2023 Sep 12.
6
Angiography-derived fractional flow reserve versus intravascular ultrasound to guide percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with coronary artery disease (FLAVOUR II): a multicentre, randomised, non-inferiority trial.血管造影衍生的血流储备分数对比血管内超声在冠状动脉疾病患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗中的应用(FLAVOUR II):一项多中心、随机、非劣效性试验
Lancet. 2025 Apr 26;405(10488):1491-1504. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(25)00504-5. Epub 2025 Mar 30.
7
A randomised multicentre study of angiography- versus physiologyguided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing TAVI: design and rationale of the FAITAVI trial.经导管主动脉瓣置换术患者中基于血管造影与生理学指导的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的随机多中心研究:FAITAVI 试验的设计与原理。
EuroIntervention. 2024 Apr 15;20(8):e504-e510. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00679.
8
Transcatheter or surgical treatment of severe aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease: A comparative analysis from the Italian OBSERVANT study.经导管或手术治疗严重主动脉瓣狭窄合并冠状动脉疾病:来自意大利 OBSERVANT 研究的对比分析。
Int J Cardiol. 2018 Nov 1;270:102-106. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.06.011. Epub 2018 Jun 7.
9
In-hospital outcomes following percutaneous versus surgical intervention in the treatment of aortic stenosis and concomitant coronary artery disease.经皮与手术干预治疗主动脉瓣狭窄合并冠状动脉疾病的院内转归。
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2023 Aug;76(8):600-608. doi: 10.1016/j.rec.2022.12.011. Epub 2023 Jan 18.
10
Surgical vs Transcatheter Treatment in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease and Severe Aortic Stenosis.冠状动脉疾病合并严重主动脉瓣狭窄患者的外科治疗与经导管治疗。
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2024 Nov 11;17(21):2472-2485. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2024.09.003.

引用本文的文献

1
Outcomes of Transcatheter or Surgical Treatment of Severe Aortic Stenosis in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease.冠心病患者严重主动脉瓣狭窄的经导管或手术治疗结果
Struct Heart. 2025 Jul 29;9(9):100709. doi: 10.1016/j.shj.2025.100709. eCollection 2025 Sep.
2
Co-Occurrence of Aortic Stenosis and Coronary Artery Disease: Facing Challenges Before, During, and After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.主动脉瓣狭窄与冠状动脉疾病的共病:经导管主动脉瓣置换术前、术中和术后面临的挑战
J Clin Med. 2025 Jul 3;14(13):4709. doi: 10.3390/jcm14134709.
3
The efficacy and safety of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing TAVI: a network meta-analysis.
经导管主动脉瓣植入术患者抗血栓治疗的疗效与安全性:一项网状荟萃分析
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2025 Jul 4;25(1):474. doi: 10.1186/s12872-025-04862-x.
4
Comparisons of treatment performance and therapy sequences in neuroendocrine neoplasms using progression-free survival ratios.使用无进展生存率比较神经内分泌肿瘤的治疗效果和治疗顺序。
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2025 Jun 21. doi: 10.1007/s00259-025-07411-y.
5
Comparative outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid vs. tricuspid aortic valve stenosis patients: insights from the SWEDEHEART registry.二叶式与三叶式主动脉瓣狭窄患者经导管主动脉瓣置换术的比较结果:来自瑞典心脏注册研究的见解
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2025 May 14;59:101705. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2025.101705. eCollection 2025 Aug.