首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine >Efficacy of one- vs. two-stent implantation for coronary bifurcation lesions in diabetic patients utilizing AIR2 as an endpoint
【2h】

Efficacy of one- vs. two-stent implantation for coronary bifurcation lesions in diabetic patients utilizing AIR2 as an endpoint

机译:以AIR2为终点的一支架和两支架植入术对糖尿病患者冠状动脉分叉病变的疗效

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: This study aimed to assess the long term outcomes (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and silent restenosis at 12 months) of one-stent vs. two-stent implantation due to coronary bifurcation lesionsin diabetic patients using AIR2 as a new endpoint. Methods and Results: A total of 178 diabetic patients with true coronary bifurcation lesions underwent percutaneous coronary intervention in the DK-Crush trials. All patients were stratified based on the stent placement strategy: one-stent group (n=76) and two-stent group (n=102). Results showed the primary endpoint, AIR2, in one-stent group was twice that in two-stent group (32.9% vs. 16.7%, P=0.013). The incidence of silent restenosis at 12 months was also significantly higher in one-stent group (19.7% versus 4.9%, P=0.003). Moreover, Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed the cumulative AIR2-free survival rate after a 12-month follow-up was markedly lower in one-stent group than in two-stent group. Interestingly, MACEs, including death, myocardial infarction and repeat revascularization, were not comparable between 2 groups (13.2% vs. 12.7%, P=0.935). Likewise, the incidence of definite or probable ST in one-stent group was also similar to that in two-stent group (2.6% vs. 4.9%, P=0.761). Conclusion: Our study indicates that, in terms of the AIR2 as a combined clinical and angiographic endpoint, two-stent implantation is superior to one-stent implantation for the treatment of coronary bifurcation intervention in diabetic patients.
机译:目的:本研究旨在评估使用AIR2的糖尿病患者因冠状动脉分叉病变而行一支架与两支架植入术的长期结果(全因死亡,心肌梗塞,靶血管血运重建和12个月无症状性再狭窄)。作为新的端点。方法和结果:在DK-Crush试验中,总共178例真正的冠状动脉分叉病变的糖尿病患者接受了经皮冠状动脉介入治疗。所有患者根据支架置入策略进行分层:一个支架组(n = 76)和两个支架组(n = 102)。结果显示,一个支架组的主要终点AIR2是两个支架组的两倍(分别为32.9%和16.7%,P = 0.013)。单支架组在12个月时无声再狭窄的发生率也显着更高(19.7%对4.9%,P = 0.003)。此外,Kaplan-Meier分析显示,在一个12个月的随访中,一个支架组的累积无AIR2存活率明显低于两个支架组。有趣的是,包括死亡,心肌梗塞和再次血运重建在内的MACE在两组之间没有可比性(13.2%vs. 12.7%,P = 0.935)。同样,在一个支架组中明确或可能的ST发生率也与在两个支架组中相似(2.6%vs. 4.9%,P = 0.761)。结论:我们的研究表明,就AIR2作为临床和血管造影的联合终点而言,在糖尿病患者的冠状动脉分叉介入治疗中,两支架植入优于单支架植入。

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