• 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

Prospective case-control comparison of percutaneous transluminal coronary revascularization in patients with multivessel disease treated in 1986-1987 versus 1991: improved in-hospital and 12-month results. Multivessel Angioplasty Prognosis Study (MAPS) Group.

作者信息

Ellis S G, Cowley M J, Whitlow P L, Vandormael M, Lincoff A M, DiSciascio G, Dean L S, Topol E J

机构信息

Department of Cardiology, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Ohio.

出版信息

J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995 Apr;25(5):1137-42. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(94)00541-w.

DOI:10.1016/0735-1097(94)00541-w
PMID:7897127
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to ascertain whether early and 12-month clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary revascularization have improved between 1986-1987 and 1991.

BACKGROUND

Since the mid-1980s, when the results of percutaneous revascularization were considered to be somewhat static, justifying large-scale clinical trials of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus other modes of therapy, balloon technology has improved, and several new percutaneous revascularization techniques have become available. The clinical results of the current integrated approach to revascularization compared with those for coronary angioplasty alone in the late 1980s are not known.

METHODS

In this prospective case-control study, 200 consecutively treated patients with multivessel disease in 1991 were studied prospectively and compared with 400 consecutive patients from the same centers during 1986-1987. Patients from 1991 were matched with earlier patients on the basis of four previously described prognostic determinants (left ventricular ejection fraction, presence of unstable angina, diabetes and target lesion morphology score) and the treating institution and were assessed for treatment outcome (completeness of revascularization, procedural success and event-free survival [freedom from death, myocardial infarction and further revascularization]).

RESULTS

The 1991 cohort of patients was older (mean [+/- SD] age 62 +/- 11 vs. 58 +/- 11 years, p < 0.001) and tended to have slightly worse left ventricular function (ejection fraction 56 +/- 10% vs. 58 +/- 11%, p = 0.009) than the 1986-1987 cohort. Overall lesion morphology risk scores were similar. New devices (other than coronary angioplasty) were used in 26% of patients. The 1991 patient cohort had more frequent total revascularization (35% vs. 21%, p = 0.003), fewer emergency bypass operations (1.0% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.006) and an improved overall procedural success rate (90% vs. 84%, p = 0.04). In addition, at 12 months the event-free survival rate was superior in the 1991 cohort (73.3% vs. 63.6%, p = 0.02), although there was no difference in infarct-free survival rate (94.6% vs. 93.2%, p = NS).

CONCLUSIONS

Improved results with percutaneous revascularization in 1991 have important implications for patient care and interpretation of ongoing randomized trials enrolling patients in the late 1980s and intending to compare standard coronary angioplasty with other forms of therapy.

摘要

相似文献

1
Prospective case-control comparison of percutaneous transluminal coronary revascularization in patients with multivessel disease treated in 1986-1987 versus 1991: improved in-hospital and 12-month results. Multivessel Angioplasty Prognosis Study (MAPS) Group.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995 Apr;25(5):1137-42. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(94)00541-w.
2
Is traditionally defined complete revascularization needed for patients with multivessel disease treated by elective coronary angioplasty? Multivessel Angioplasty Prognosis Study (MAPS) Group.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993 Nov 1;22(5):1289-97. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(93)90532-6.
3
Importance of diabetes mellitus and systemic hypertension rather than completeness of revascularization in determining long-term outcome after coronary balloon angioplasty (the LDCMC registry). Lady Davis Carmel Medical Center.糖尿病和系统性高血压在决定冠状动脉球囊血管成形术(LDCMC注册研究)后的长期预后中的重要性,而非血管重建的完整性。戴维斯夫人卡梅尔医疗中心。
Am J Cardiol. 1998 Sep 1;82(5):547-53. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9149(98)00413-5.
4
Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI): in-hospital results and 1-year follow-up. ERACI Group.阿根廷多支血管病变患者经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术与冠状动脉搭桥手术对比的随机试验(ERACI):住院结果及1年随访。ERACI研究组
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993 Oct;22(4):1060-7. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(93)90416-x.
5
Is a strategy of intended incomplete percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty revascularization acceptable in nondiabetic patients who are candidates for coronary artery bypass graft surgery? The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI).对于适合冠状动脉旁路移植手术的非糖尿病患者,意向性不完全经皮腔内冠状动脉血管成形术血运重建策略是否可接受?旁路血管成形术血运重建调查(BARI)。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999 May;33(6):1627-36. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(99)00077-7.
6
Contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention versus balloon angioplasty for multivessel coronary artery disease: a comparison of the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry and the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) study.当代经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与球囊血管成形术治疗多支冠状动脉疾病的比较:美国国立心肺血液研究所动态注册研究与旁路血管成形术血运重建调查(BARI)研究的对比
Circulation. 2002 Sep 24;106(13):1627-33. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.0000031570.27023.79.
7
Three-year follow-up of the Argentine Randomized Trial of Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery in Multivessel Disease (ERACI).
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996 Apr;27(5):1178-84. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(95)00592-7.
8
Revascularization therapy for coronary artery disease. Coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty.冠状动脉疾病的血运重建治疗。冠状动脉旁路移植术与经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术。
Tex Heart Inst J. 1995;22(2):145-61.
9
The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Study: 5-year follow-up of revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in diabetic patients with multivessel disease.Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Study:5 年随访:多血管病变糖尿病患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉旁路移植术血运重建的比较。
J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2010 Jan;11(1):26-33. doi: 10.2459/JCM.0b013e328330ea32.
10
Angioplasty versus bypass surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease with left ventricular ejection fraction < or = 40%.血管成形术与冠状动脉搭桥手术治疗左心室射血分数≤40%的多支冠状动脉疾病
Am J Cardiol. 1993 Apr 15;71(11):897-901. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(93)90903-p.

引用本文的文献

1
Coronary Angioplasty.
Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2003 Feb;5(1):13-24. doi: 10.1007/s11936-003-0011-2.
2
Immediate and chronic results of cutting balloon angioplasty: a matched comparison with conventional angioplasty.切割球囊血管成形术的即刻和长期结果:与传统血管成形术的配对比较。
Clin Cardiol. 1997 May;20(5):459-63. doi: 10.1002/clc.4960200511.