首页> 外文期刊>The Canadian journal of cardiology >Impact of Interventional Strategy for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Long-term Survival
【24h】

Impact of Interventional Strategy for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Long-term Survival

机译:无保护的左主干动脉经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的干预策略对长期生存的影响

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) is feasible. In cases involving the left anterior descending-left circumflex bifurcation, the optimal interventional strategy remains unclear. Randomized bifurcation trials in the past excluded ULMCA lesions. Methods: A single-centre registry study with retrospective analysis of the interventional protocols and procedural angiograms of 102 patients who underwent stent PCI of ULMCA was performed in order to evaluate the impact of the interventional strategy on long-term survival. Results: Isolated stenting of the ostium or mid ULMCA without bifurcation stenting was performed in 19 patients. Most interventions (n = 83) involved the left main bifurcation. Distal or bifurcation lesions were treated by provisional T-stenting in cases of single involved ostium (left anterior descending or right circumflex) or systematic T-stenting or V-stenting if both proximal coronary arteries were involved (n = 19). The majority (96%) of patients received drug-eluting stents. The long-term survival (mean follow-up = 3.4 ± 1.7 years) of patients was influenced by the interventional strategy. A single-stent strategy involving the bifurcation without side branch intervention was associated with less-favourable long-term survival (hazard ratio 4.08; 95% confidence interval, 1.91-8.69; multivariable Cox regression analysis). Conclusions: This prospective observational study suggests that single-stent PCI involving the bifurcation without side branch intervention of ULMCA is possibly associated with higher long-term mortality. ULMCA-PCI involving the bifurcation is possible with similar results compared with isolated PCI of ULMCA shaft or ostium. Large, randomized trials are warranted for comparison of optimal technical approach to LMCA interventions.
机译:背景:无保护的左主冠状动脉(ULMCA)的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)是可行的。在涉及左前降支和左旋支的情况下,最佳的干预策略仍不清楚。过去的随机分叉试验排除了ULMCA病变。方法:对102例行ULMCA支架PCI的患者的介入方案和程序血管造影进行回顾性分析,进行单中心登记研究,以评估介入策略对长期生存的影响。结果:19例患者行单纯的支架或中ULMCA支架置入,无分叉支架置入。大多数干预措施(n = 83)涉及左主干分叉。如果单个累及的孔口(左前降或右旋支)或系统性T型支架或V型支架(如果同时累及两个近端冠状动脉),则通过临时T型支架治疗远端或分叉病变(n = 19)。大多数(96%)患者接受了药物洗脱支架。患者的长期生存(平均随访时间= 3.4±1.7年)受干预策略的影响。涉及分叉而不需侧支干预的单支架策略与较差的长期生存率相关(危险比4.08; 95%置信区间为1.91-8.69;多变量Cox回归分析)。结论:这项前瞻性观察研究表明,单支PCI介入而无ULMCA侧支介入的分叉可能与较高的长期死亡率相关。与分叉的ULMCA竖井或心口的PCI相比,涉及分支的ULMCA-PCI可能具有相似的结果。大型随机试验有必要比较LMCA干预的最佳技术方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
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