首页> 外文期刊>JACC. Cardiovascular interventions >5-year results of a randomized comparison of XIENCE v everolimus-eluting and TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stents: Final results from the SPIRIT III trial (Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE v Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients with de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions)
【24h】

5-year results of a randomized comparison of XIENCE v everolimus-eluting and TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stents: Final results from the SPIRIT III trial (Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE v Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients with de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions)

机译:XIENCE v依维莫司洗脱支架和TAXUS紫杉醇洗脱支架的随机比较的5年结果:SPIRIT III试验的最终结果(XIENCE v依维莫司洗脱冠状动脉支架系统在治疗de Novo原生冠状动脉疾病中的临床评价动脉病变)

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Objectives This study sought to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in patients with obstructive coronary artery disease. Background The use of EES compared to PES has been shown to result in improved clinical outcomes in patients undergoing PCI. However, there have been concerns regarding the durability of these benefits over longer-term follow-up. Methods SPIRIT III was a prospective, multicenter trial in which 1,002 patients were randomized 2:1 to EES versus PES. Endpoints included ischemia-driven target vessel failure (TVF) (death, myocardial infarction (MI), or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization [TVR]), the pre-specified primary endpoint), target lesion failure (TLF) (cardiac death, target-vessel MI, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization [TLR]), major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (cardiac death, MI, or ischemia-driven TLR), their individual components and stent thrombosis. Results Five-year follow-up was available in 91.9% of patients. Treatment with EES versus PES resulted in lower 5-year Kaplan-Meier rates of TVF (19.3% vs. 24.5%, p = 0.05), TLF (12.7% vs. 19.0%, p = 0.008), and MACE (13.2% vs. 20.7%, p = 0.007). EES also resulted in reduced rates of all-cause death (5.9% vs. 10.1%, p = 0.02), with nonsignificantly different rates of MI, stent thrombosis, and TLR, and no evidence of late catch-up of TLR over time. Conclusions At 5 years after treatment, EES compared to PES resulted in durable benefits in composite safety and efficacy measures as well as all-cause mortality. Additionally, the absolute difference in TLR between devices remained stable over time without deterioration of effect during late follow-up.
机译:目的本研究旨在评估依维莫司洗脱支架(EES)和紫杉醇洗脱支架(PES)在阻塞性冠状动脉疾病患者中的长期安全性和有效性。背景技术与PES相比,EES的使用已显示可改善PCI患者的临床疗效。但是,人们担心这些益处在长期随访中的持久性。方法SPIRIT III是一项前瞻性,多中心试验,其中1,002例患者按2:1的比例随机分为EES与PES。终点包括缺血驱动的目标血管衰竭(TVF)(死亡,心肌梗塞(MI)或缺血驱动的目标血管血运重建[TVR]),预先指定的主要终点),目标病变失败(TLF)(心脏死亡,目标血管MI,或缺血驱动的目标病变血运重建[TLR]),主要不良心脏事件(MACE)(心脏死亡,MI或缺血驱动的TLR),它们的个体成分和支架血栓形成。结果91.9%的患者可以进行五年随访。 EES与PES的治疗可降低TVF的5年Kaplan-Meier率(19.3%vs.24.5%,p = 0.05),TLF(12.7%vs. 19.0%,p = 0.008)和MACE(13.2%vs. 20.7%,p = 0.007)。 EES还导致全因死亡率降低(5.9%对10.1%,p = 0.02),MI,支架血栓形成和TLR的发生率无显着差异,并且没有证据表明随着时间的流逝,TLR的追赶迟到。结论在治疗后5年,EES与PES相比在复合安全性和有效性措施以及全因死亡率方面具有持久的优势。此外,设备之间的TLR绝对差值会随时间推移保持稳定,而在后续随访中效果不会降低。

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