首页> 外文期刊>JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association >Sirolimus-eluting stents vs paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease: meta-analysis of randomized trials.
【24h】

Sirolimus-eluting stents vs paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease: meta-analysis of randomized trials.

机译:西罗莫司洗脱支架与紫杉醇洗脱支架在冠心病患者中的疗效:随机试验的荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

CONTEXT: Placement of sirolimus-eluting stents or paclitaxel-eluting stents has emerged as the predominant percutaneous treatment strategy in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Whether there are any differences in efficacy and safety between these 2 drug-eluting stents is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes of sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents on the basis of data generated by randomized head-to-head clinical trials. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, conference proceedings from major cardiology meetings, and Internet-based sources of information on clinical trials in cardiology from January 2003 to April 2005. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials comparing the sirolimus-eluting stent with the paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with CAD reporting the outcomes of interest (target lesion revascularization, angiographic restenosis, stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction [MI], death, and the composite of death or MI) during a follow-up of at least 6 months. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently identified studies and abstracted data on sample size, baseline characteristics, and outcomes of interest. DATA SYNTHESIS: Six trials, including 3669 patients, met the selection criteria. No significant heterogeneity was found across trials. Target lesion revascularization, the primary outcome of interest, was less frequently performed in patients who were treated with the sirolimus-eluting stent (5.1%) vs the paclitaxel-eluting stent (7.8%) (odds ratio [OR], 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49-0.84; P = .001). Similarly, angiographic restenosis was less frequently observed among patients assigned to the sirolimus-eluting stent (9.3%) vs the paclitaxel-eluting stent (13.1%) (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.55-0.86; P = .001). Event rates for sirolimus-eluting vs paclitaxel-eluting stents were 0.9% and 1.1%, respectively, for stent thrombosis (P = .62); 1.4% and 1.6%, respectively, for death (P = .56); and 4.9% and 5.8%, respectively, for the composite of death or MI (P = .23). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving sirolimus-eluting stents had a significantly lower risk of restenosis and target vessel revascularization compared with those receiving paclitaxel-eluting stents. Rates of death, death or MI, and stent thrombosis were similar.
机译:背景:在冠心病(CAD)患者中,放置西罗莫司洗脱支架或紫杉醇洗脱支架已成为主要的经皮治疗策略。目前尚不清楚这两种药物洗脱支架在功效和安全性方面是否存在任何差异。目的:根据随机头对头临床试验产生的数据,比较西罗莫司洗脱和紫杉醇洗脱冠状动脉支架的疗效。数据来源:PubMed和Cochrane对照试验中央注册簿,主要心脏病学会议的会议记录以及2003年1月至2005年4月基于Internet的心脏病学临床试验信息来源。研究选择:比较西罗莫司洗脱支架的随机试验至少在随访期间至少有CAD的患者使用紫杉醇洗脱支架报告感兴趣的结果(靶病变血运重建,血管造影再狭窄,支架血栓形成,心肌梗塞[MI],死亡以及死亡或MI的复合物) 6个月。数据提取:两名评价员独立鉴定研究并提取有关样本量,基线特征和感兴趣结果的数据。数据综合:六个试验,包括3669例患者,符合选择标准。在所有试验中均未发现明显的异质性。靶向靶病变血运重建是主要的研究结果,在接受西罗莫司洗脱支架(5.1%)和紫杉醇洗脱支架(7.8%)治疗的患者中,执行频率较低(赔率[OR],0.64; 95%置信区间[CI],0.49-0.84; P = 0.001)。同样,在分配给西罗莫司洗脱支架的患者(9.3%)和紫杉醇洗脱支架的患者(13.1%)中,血管造影再狭窄的发生率较低(OR,0.68; 95%CI,0.55-0.86; P = .001)。西罗莫司洗脱支架与紫杉醇洗脱支架发生支架血栓形成的发生率分别为0.9%和1.1%(P = 0.62)。死亡分别为1.4%和1.6%(P = .56);死亡或心梗复合物分别为4.9%和5.8%(P = 0.23)。结论:与接受紫杉醇洗脱支架的患者相比,接受西罗莫司洗脱支架的患者再狭窄和靶血管血运重建的风险显着降低。死亡率,死亡或心肌梗死以及支架血栓形成的发生率相似。

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