首页> 外文期刊>JACC. Cardiovascular interventions >Drug-eluting stent for left main coronary artery disease: The DELTA registry: A multicenter registry evaluating percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting for left main treatment
【24h】

Drug-eluting stent for left main coronary artery disease: The DELTA registry: A multicenter registry evaluating percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting for left main treatment

机译:用于左主干冠状动脉疾病的药物洗脱支架:DELTA注册中心:评估经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与左主干冠状动脉搭桥术的多中心注册中心

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare, in a large all-comers registry, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis. Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention with DES implantation in ULMCA has been shown to be a feasible and safe approach at midterm clinical follow-up. Methods: All consecutive patients with ULMCA stenosis treated by PCI with DES versus CABG were analyzed in this multinational registry. A propensity score analysis was performed to adjust for baseline differences in the overall cohort. Results: In total 2,775 patients were included: 1,874 were treated with PCI versus 901 with CABG. At 1,295 (interquartile range: 928 to 1,713) days, there were no differences, at the adjusted analysis, in the primary composite endpoint of death, cerebrovascular accidents, and myocardial infarction (MI) (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.85 to 1.42; p = 0.47), mortality (adjusted HR: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.55; p = 0.32), or composite endpoint of death and MI (adjusted HR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.64; p = 0.11). An advantage of CABG over PCI was observed in the composite secondary endpoint of MACCE (adjusted HR: 1.64; 95% CI: 1.33 to 2.03; p < 0.0001), driven exclusively by the higher incidence of target vessel revascularization with PCI. Conclusions: In our multinational all-comers registry, no difference was observed in the occurrence of death, cerebrovascular accidents, and MI between PCI and CABG. An advantage of CABG over PCI was observed in the incidence of MACCE, driven by the higher incidence of target vessel revascularization with PCI.
机译:目的:本研究的目的是在大型全登记患者中比较第一代药物洗脱支架(DES)与第一代药物洗脱支架经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后发生的主要心脏和脑血管不良事件(MACCE)未保护的左主冠状动脉(ULMCA)狭窄中植入移植物(CABG)。背景:在中期临床随访中,经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(DES)植入ULMCA的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗已被证明是一种可行且安全的方法。方法:在该跨国注册中心分析了所有接受DES与CABG联合PCI治疗的ULMCA狭窄患者。进行倾向得分分析以调整总体队列的基线差异。结果:总共包括2775名患者:1874例接受PCI治疗,而901例接受CABG治疗。经过调整的分析,在1,295天(四分位间距:928至1,713天),死亡,脑血管意外和心肌梗死(MI)的主要复合终点没有差异(调整后的危险比[HR]:1.11; 95)置信区间百分比[CI]:0.85至1.42; p = 0.47),死亡率(调整后的HR:1.16; 95%CI:0.87至1.55; p = 0.32)或死亡和MI的综合终点(调整后的HR:1.25; 95) %CI:0.95至1.64; p = 0.11)。在MACCE的复合次要终点(调整后的HR:1.64; 95%CI:1.33至2.03; p <0.0001)中观察到CABG优于PCI,这完全是由于PCI靶血管血运重建发生率更高。结论:在我们的跨国公司名单中,PCI和CABG之间的死亡,脑血管意外和心梗发生率没有差异。在PCI的靶血管血运重建发生率较高的驱动下,在MACCE发生率中观察到了CABG优于PCI的优势。

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