Keenan C R, Chou T M
University of California School of Medicine, San Francisco, USA.
West J Med. 1998 Apr;168(4):280-5.
Since the advent of bypass surgery in the late 1960s and catheter-based intervention in the late 1970s, the treatment of coronary artery disease has been revolutionized by the concept of revascularization. Surveys have demonstrated that the practice patterns around the world and within the US are inconsistent for these important treatment options and are often driven by availability and economics rather than evidence-based data. In addition, the studies examining the use of medical therapy, balloon angioplasty, atherectomy, coronary stenting, and bypass surgery are consistently lagging behind the technological advances in this field. This article reviews the data that randomized trials and meta-analyses provide to compare these modalities. We attempt to provide a framework for reasoned clinical decision making to help guide patient care. While the breakpoints between the medicine bottle, cath lab, and operating room will continue to evolve, we offer a revascularization strategy for patient subgroups based on what clinical data supports.
自20世纪60年代末搭桥手术以及20世纪70年代末基于导管的介入治疗出现以来,冠状动脉疾病的治疗因血运重建的理念而发生了革命性变化。调查表明,对于这些重要的治疗选择,全球及美国国内的实践模式并不一致,且往往受可及性和经济因素驱动,而非基于循证数据。此外,关于药物治疗、球囊血管成形术、斑块旋切术、冠状动脉支架置入术和搭桥手术使用情况的研究一直落后于该领域的技术进步。本文回顾了随机试验和荟萃分析提供的用以比较这些治疗方式的数据。我们试图提供一个合理的临床决策框架,以帮助指导患者护理。虽然药物治疗、导管室治疗和手术室治疗之间的界限将持续演变,但我们根据支持的临床数据为患者亚组提供了一种血运重建策略。