• 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

多支冠状动脉疾病糖尿病患者冠状动脉旁路移植术与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的六年结局

Six-Year Outcomes of CABG vs PCI in Diabetic Patients with Multivessel Coronary Disease.

作者信息

Jonik Szymon, Piasecki Adam, Jastrzębska Anna, Opolski Grzegorz, Grabowski Marcin, Huczek Zenon, Kochman Janusz

机构信息

1st Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.

出版信息

Med Sci Monit. 2025 Jun 26;31:e948348. doi: 10.12659/MSM.948348.

DOI:10.12659/MSM.948348
PMID:40566650
Abstract

BACKGROUND Many randomized controlled trials have explored the optimal revascularization strategy for patients with diabetes, but real-life outcomes are still poorly investigated. We assessed the complete 6-year outcomes of diabetic individuals with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD) treated either with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). MATERIAL AND METHODS We reviewed data of all patients from 176 local Heart Team meetings and their treatment recommendations and assessed primary and secondary endpoints of 317 MVD patients with diabetes qualified either for CABG or PCI (98 and 219 patients, respectively) with subsequent optimal medical therapy. RESULTS At 6 years, no significant difference in overall mortality was observed (16.3% vs 20.5% for PCI, P=0.38). The incidence of myocardial infarction (MI) was higher in patients treated percutaneously (4.1% vs 12.3% for PCI, P=0.02), while those undergoing CABG had significantly longer postprocedural hospital stay (10.7 vs 4.4 days for PCI, P<0.01). The occurrence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), mainly driven by the increased rate of repeat revascularization (RR), was higher in the PCI group (83.6% vs 44.9%, P<0.01 and 47.0% vs 17.3%, P<0.01, respectively). The rates of stroke and in-hospital mortality were similar between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS For MVD patients with diabetes, CABG was superior in real-life clinical practice in terms of rates of MI, RR, and MACCE, while postprocedural hospital stays were shorted with PCI. The rates of all-cause death, stroke, and in-hospital mortality were comparable between groups.

摘要

背景 许多随机对照试验探讨了糖尿病患者的最佳血运重建策略,但对实际治疗效果的研究仍较少。我们评估了多支冠状动脉疾病(MVD)的糖尿病患者接受冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)或经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后的6年完整治疗效果。

材料与方法 我们回顾了176次当地心脏团队会议中所有患者的数据及其治疗建议,并评估了317例符合CABG或PCI标准(分别为98例和219例患者)的MVD糖尿病患者在接受后续最佳药物治疗后的主要和次要终点。

结果 6年后,总体死亡率无显著差异(PCI组为16.3%,CABG组为20.5%,P = 0.38)。接受PCI治疗的患者心肌梗死(MI)发生率更高(PCI组为4.1%,CABG组为12.3%,P = 0.02),而接受CABG治疗的患者术后住院时间明显更长(PCI组为4.4天,CABG组为10.7天,P < 0.01)。PCI组主要由重复血运重建率(RR)增加导致的主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE)发生率更高(分别为83.6%对44.9%,P < 0.01和47.0%对17.3%,P < 0.01)。两组之间的中风和住院死亡率相似。

结论 对于患有MVD的糖尿病患者,在实际临床实践中,就MI、RR和MACCE发生率而言,CABG更具优势,而PCI术后住院时间更短。两组之间的全因死亡率、中风和住院死亡率相当。

相似文献

1
Six-Year Outcomes of CABG vs PCI in Diabetic Patients with Multivessel Coronary Disease.多支冠状动脉疾病糖尿病患者冠状动脉旁路移植术与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的六年结局
Med Sci Monit. 2025 Jun 26;31:e948348. doi: 10.12659/MSM.948348.
2
FFR-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention vs Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Diabetes.糖尿病患者中,基于血流储备分数(FFR)指导的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术的比较
JAMA Cardiol. 2025 Jun 1;10(6):603-608. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2025.0095.
3
Mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting for coronary artery disease: a pooled analysis of individual patient data.冠状动脉旁路移植术与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗支架置入治疗冠状动脉疾病的死亡率:一项个体患者数据的合并分析。
Lancet. 2018 Mar 10;391(10124):939-948. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30423-9. Epub 2018 Feb 23.
4
Ten-year outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting for multivessel or left main coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.多支血管病变或左主干冠状动脉疾病行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗 10 年的结局:系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2023 Feb 2;18(1):54. doi: 10.1186/s13019-023-02101-y.
5
Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease.基于运动的冠心病心脏康复。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Nov 6;11(11):CD001800. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001800.pub4.
6
Comparison of long-term outcomes of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention for left main disease.微创冠状动脉旁路移植术与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗左主干病变的长期疗效比较。
Coron Artery Dis. 2025 Aug 1;36(5):406-415. doi: 10.1097/MCA.0000000000001504. Epub 2025 Jan 17.
7
Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease.基于运动的冠心病心脏康复
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Jan 5;2016(1):CD001800. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001800.pub3.
8
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Chronic Total Occlusion of Coronary Arteries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗冠状动脉慢性完全闭塞的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。
J Interv Cardiol. 2023 Nov 6;2023:9928347. doi: 10.1155/2023/9928347. eCollection 2023.
9
Percutaneous coronary intervention vs coronary artery bypass grafting for left main coronary artery disease? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗左主干冠状动脉疾病的比较?一项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Cardiovasc Ther. 2017 Jun;35(3). doi: 10.1111/1755-5922.12260.
10
Coronary artery bypass surgery compared with percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 6 randomized controlled trials.胰岛素治疗的2型糖尿病患者冠状动脉搭桥手术与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的比较:6项随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析
Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2016 Jan 6;15:2. doi: 10.1186/s12933-015-0323-z.

本文引用的文献

1
2024 ESC Guidelines for the management of chronic coronary syndromes.2024年欧洲心脏病学会慢性冠状动脉综合征管理指南
Eur Heart J. 2024 Sep 29;45(36):3415-3537. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehae177.
2
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Left Main Disease With and Without Diabetes: Findings From a Pooled Analysis of 4 Randomized Clinical Trials.伴有或不伴有糖尿病的左主干病变患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术的比较:来自4项随机临床试验汇总分析的结果
Circulation. 2024 Apr 23;149(17):1328-1338. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.123.065571. Epub 2024 Mar 11.
3
2. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024.
2. 糖尿病的诊断与分类:《2024年糖尿病医疗护理标准》
Diabetes Care. 2024 Jan 1;47(Suppl 1):S20-S42. doi: 10.2337/dc24-S002.
4
Long term outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention vs coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with diabetes mellitus with multi vessels diseases: A meta-analysis.经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗多支血管病变糖尿病患者的长期疗效:一项荟萃分析。
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc. 2023 Feb 26;46:101185. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2023.101185. eCollection 2023 Jun.
5
Cardiovascular risk in diabetes mellitus: epidemiology, assessment and prevention.糖尿病患者的心血管风险:流行病学、评估和预防。
Nat Rev Cardiol. 2023 Oct;20(10):685-695. doi: 10.1038/s41569-023-00877-z. Epub 2023 May 16.
6
Optimal Management of Patients with Severe Coronary Artery Disease following Multidisciplinary Heart Team Approach-Insights from Tertiary Cardiovascular Care Center.多学科心脏团队治疗方案后严重冠状动脉疾病患者的最佳管理-来自三级心血管治疗中心的见解。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Mar 25;19(7):3933. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19073933.
7
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 ACC/AHA/SCAI 冠状动脉血运重建指南:美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会联合临床实践指南委员会的报告。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022 Jan 18;79(2):e21-e129. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.09.006. Epub 2021 Dec 9.
8
IDF Diabetes Atlas: Global, regional and country-level diabetes prevalence estimates for 2021 and projections for 2045.国际糖尿病联盟(IDF)糖尿病地图集:2021 年全球、区域和国家糖尿病患病率估算值以及 2045 年预测值。
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2022 Jan;183:109119. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2021.109119. Epub 2021 Dec 6.
9
The Leading Causes of Death in the US for 2020.2020年美国的主要死因。
JAMA. 2021 May 11;325(18):1829-1830. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.5469.
10
Global Epidemiology of Ischemic Heart Disease: Results from the Global Burden of Disease Study.缺血性心脏病的全球流行病学:全球疾病负担研究结果
Cureus. 2020 Jul 23;12(7):e9349. doi: 10.7759/cureus.9349.