...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medicine >Accounting for the mortality benefit of drug-eluting stents in percutaneous coronary intervention: a comparison of methods in a retrospective cohort study
【24h】

Accounting for the mortality benefit of drug-eluting stents in percutaneous coronary intervention: a comparison of methods in a retrospective cohort study

机译:经皮冠状动脉干预中药物洗脱支架的死亡效益:回顾性队列研究中的方法比较

获取原文

摘要

Background Drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce rates of restenosis compared with bare metal stents (BMS). A number of observational studies have also found lower rates of mortality and non-fatal myocardial infarction with DES compared with BMS, findings not observed in randomized clinical trials. In order to explore reasons for this discrepancy, we compared outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with DES or BMS by multiple statistical methods. Methods We compared short-term rates of all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction for patients undergoing PCI with DES or BMS using propensity-score adjustment, propensity-score matching, and a stent-era comparison in a large, integrated health system between 1998 and 2007. For the propensity-score adjustment and stent era comparisons, we used multivariable logistic regression to assess the association of stent type with outcomes. We used McNemar's Chi-square test to compare outcomes for propensity-score matching. Results Between 1998 and 2007, 35,438 PCIs with stenting were performed among health plan members (53.9% DES and 46.1% BMS). After propensity-score adjustment, DES was associated with significantly lower rates of death at 30 days (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.39 - 0.63, P P P Conclusions Although propensity-score methods suggested a mortality benefit with DES, consistent with prior observational studies, a stent era comparison failed to support this conclusion. Unobserved factors influencing stent selection in observational studies likely account for the observed mortality benefit of DES not seen in randomized clinical trials.
机译:背景技术药物洗脱支架(DES)与裸金属支架(BMS)相比,减少再狭窄率。许多观察性研究还发现,与BMS相比,DES的死亡率和非致命心肌梗死率较低,在随机临床试验中未观察到的结果。为了探讨这种差异的原因,我们通过多种统计方法与DES或BMS经皮冠状动脉干预(PCI)后的结果进行比较。方法对患者与使用倾向评分调整,倾向评分匹配的患者进行PCI的患者比较了全因死亡率和心肌梗塞的短期率,以及在1998年间的大型综合健康系统中的一块综合健康系统中的一站比较2007年,对于倾向评分调整和支架的时代比较,我们使用多变量的逻辑回归来评估支架类型与结果的关联。我们使用McNemar的Chi-Square测试来比较倾向分数匹配的结果。成果于1998年至2007年间,在卫生计划成员(53.9%DES和46.1%BMS)之间进行了35,438名PCIS。在分数调整后,DES与30天的死亡率明显较低(或0.49,95%CI 0.39 - 0.63,PPP结论,尽管倾向评分方法表明死亡率与DES,与先前的观察研究一致,a支架ERA比较未能支持这一结论。影响观察研究中的支架选择的未观察因素可能考虑了观察到的随机临床试验中DES的死亡率益处。

著录项

获取原文

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