Suppr超能文献

冠状动脉支架置入术与球囊血管成形术的持续获益:Benestent试验的一年临床随访。Benestent研究组

Continued benefit of coronary stenting versus balloon angioplasty: one-year clinical follow-up of Benestent trial. Benestent Study Group.

作者信息

Macaya C, Serruys P W, Ruygrok P, Suryapranata H, Mast G, Klugmann S, Urban P, den Heijer P, Koch K, Simon R, Morice M C, Crean P, Bonnier H, Wijns W, Danchin N, Bourdonnec C, Morel M A

机构信息

Catheterization Laboratory, Thorax Center, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996 Feb;27(2):255-61. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(95)00473-4.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to determine the 1-year clinical follow-up of patients included in the Benestent trial.

BACKGROUND

The Benestent trial is a randomized study comparing elective Palmaz-Schatz stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with stable angina and a de novo coronary artery lesion. Seven-month follow-up data have shown a decreased rate of restenosis and fewer clinical events in the stent group. It is not established whether this favorable clinical outcome is maintained for longer periods or whether coronary stenting defers restenosis and its subsequent clinical manifestations.

METHODS

To clarify this uncertainty, we updated clinical information on all but 1 of 516 patients enrolled in the Benestent trial (257 in balloon group, 259 in stent group) at least 12 months after the intervention. Major clinical events (primary clinical end point) were tabulated according to the intention to treat principle and included death, the occurrence of a cerebrovascular accident, myocardial infarction, the need for bypass surgery or a further percutaneous intervention in the previously treated lesion.

RESULTS

After 1 year, no significant differences in mortality (1.2% vs. 0.8%), stroke (0.0% vs. 0.8%), myocardial infarction (5.0% vs. 4.2%) or coronary bypass graft surgery (6.9% vs. 5.1%) were found between the stent and balloon angioplasty groups, respectively. However, the requirement for a repeat angioplasty procedure was significantly lower in the stent group (10%) than the balloon angioplasty group (21%, relative risk [RR] 0.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31 to 0.75, p = 0.001), and overall primary end points were less frequently reached by stent group patients (23.2%) than those in the balloon group (31.5%, RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.98, p = 0.04). No differences were found between groups with respect to functional class angina and prescribed medication at the time of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

These clinical follow-up data show that the benefit of elective native coronary artery stenting in patients with stable angina is maintained to at least 1 year after the procedure and results in a significantly reduced requirement for repeat intervention.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在确定贝内斯特试验(Benestent trial)纳入患者的1年临床随访情况。

背景

贝内斯特试验是一项随机研究,比较择期植入帕尔马兹-沙茨(Palmaz-Schatz)支架与球囊血管成形术治疗稳定型心绞痛和新发冠状动脉病变患者的效果。7个月的随访数据显示,支架组的再狭窄率降低,临床事件减少。目前尚不清楚这种良好的临床结果是否能长期维持,以及冠状动脉支架置入术是否能延缓再狭窄及其后续临床表现。

方法

为了澄清这种不确定性,我们在干预至少12个月后更新了贝内斯特试验纳入的516例患者中除1例之外的所有患者的临床信息(球囊组257例,支架组259例)。主要临床事件(主要临床终点)根据意向性治疗原则进行列表统计,包括死亡、脑血管意外、心肌梗死的发生、旁路手术的需求或对先前治疗病变进行进一步经皮介入治疗的需求。

结果

1年后,支架组和球囊血管成形术组在死亡率(1.2%对0.8%)、中风(0.0%对0.8%)、心肌梗死(5.0%对4.2%)或冠状动脉旁路移植术(6.9%对5.1%)方面未发现显著差异。然而,支架组再次血管成形术的需求(10%)显著低于球囊血管成形术组(21%,相对风险[RR]0.49,95%置信区间[CI]0.31至0.75,p = 0.001),并且支架组患者达到总体主要终点的频率(23.2%)低于球囊组(31.5%,RR 0.74,95%CI 0.55至0.98,p = 0.04)。随访时,两组在心绞痛功能分级和所开药物方面未发现差异。

结论

这些临床随访数据表明,择期对稳定型心绞痛患者进行冠状动脉支架置入术的益处至少在术后1年内得以维持,并且显著降低了再次干预的需求。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验