首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Zhejiang University. Science. B >Efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stent implantation for the treatment of in-stent restenosis occurring within bare-metal stent and drug-eluting stent
【2h】

Efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stent implantation for the treatment of in-stent restenosis occurring within bare-metal stent and drug-eluting stent

机译:药物洗脱支架植入术治疗裸金属支架和药物洗脱支架内支架内再狭窄的疗效和安全性

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Objective: Although drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation is the primary treatment modality for bare-metal stent (BMS) in-stent restenosis (ISR), little is known about the efficacy and safety profile of DES in the treatment of DES-ISR. The goal of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes following DES treatment for BMS-ISR and DES-ISR. Methods: Rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were compared in 97 consecutive patients who underwent DES implantation for the treatment of ISR (56 BMS-ISR and 41 DES-ISR) from January 2004 to December 2008. Results: Baseline clinical and procedural characteristics were comparable, except that the DES used in the BMS-ISR group was longer and had a larger diameter. The length of follow-up was (28.60±1.96) and (20.34±1.54) months for the BMS-ISR and DES-ISR groups, respectively. One patient (1.8%) experienced non-cardiac mortality and one (1.8%) had target-vessel revascularization (TVR) in the BMS-ISR group. In the DES-ISR group, three patients (7.3%) died of sudden death with a documented acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and three suffered TVR (7.3%). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated that cumulative survival probability and MACE-free probability were both significantly lower for the DES-ISR group (log rank test P=0.047 and P=0.005, respectively). In Cox regression analysis, DES-ISR remained an independent predictor for future MACE occurrence after adjustment for other factors (compared with BMS-ISR, risk ratio (RR)=8.743, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.54–49.54, P=0.014). Switching to a different type of DES to treat DES-ISR did not improve the prognosis. Conclusion: DES-ISR patients had a poorer prognosis than BMS-ISR patients after DES therapy.
机译:目的:尽管药物洗脱支架(DES)植入是裸金属支架(BMS)支架内再狭窄(ISR)的主要治疗方式,但对于DES在DES-ISR的治疗中的功效和安全性了解甚少。这项研究的目的是比较DES治疗后BMS-ISR和DES-ISR的临床结果。方法:比较2004年1月至2008年12月连续97例接受DES植入治疗ISR的患者的主要不良心脏事件(MACE)发生率(56例BMS-ISR和41例DES-ISR)。结果:基线临床和程序除了在BMS-ISR组中使用的DES更长且直径更大之外,其他特性是可比的。 BMS-ISR和DES-ISR组的随访时间分别为(28.60±1.96)个月和(20.34±1.54)个月。 BMS-ISR组中有1例患者(1.8%)发生了非心脏疾病,另一例(1.8%)进行了靶血管血运重建(TVR)。在DES-ISR组中,三名患者(7.3%)因猝死而死亡,并有急性ST段抬高性心肌梗塞的记录,三名患者接受TVR(7.3%)。 Kaplan-Meier分析表明,DES-ISR组的累积生存概率和无MACE概率均显着降低(对数秩检验分别为P = 0.047和P = 0.005)。在Cox回归分析中,在调整了其他因素后(相对于BMS-ISR,风险比(RR)= 8.743,95%置信区间(CI)1.54–49.54,P = 0.014),DES-ISR仍然是未来MACE发生的独立预测因子。 )。改用其他类型的DES治疗DES-ISR并不能改善预后。结论:DES治疗后,DES-ISR患者的预后较BMS-ISR患者差。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号