...
首页> 外文期刊>The American Journal of Cardiology >Meta-Analysis of the Optimal Percutaneous Revascularization Strategy in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction, Cardiogenic Shock, and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease
【24h】

Meta-Analysis of the Optimal Percutaneous Revascularization Strategy in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction, Cardiogenic Shock, and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease

机译:急性心肌梗死患者的最佳经皮血运重建策略,心肌休克和多血糖冠状动脉疾病的荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The optimal percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) revascularization strategy in patients with multivessel (MV) coronary artery disease (CAD) who present with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) has not been systematically addressed. Accordingly, we performed a study-level meta-analysis comparing 2 PCI strategies in these patients infarct-related artery (IRA) only versus MV revascularization. Studies including patients with AMI and MV CAD complicated with CS who received primary PCI were searched from 2000 to 2016. The primary end points were in-hospital/30-day and mid- to long-term (>= 6 month) mortality. Fixed and random effects models were used for analysis. Ten studies (9 prospective and 1 retrospective) involving 6,068 patients met our inclusion criteria. IRA-only PCI was the most frequently used revascularization strategy (4,872 patients, 80%), while MV PCI was performed in 1,196 patients (20%). The MV PCI strategy was associated with higher short-term mortality compared with the IRA only PCI strategy (odds ratio 1.41, 95% confidence interval 1.15 to 1.71, p = 0.008). There was no difference in mid- to long-term mortality between MV PCI and IRA-only strategies (odds ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.58, p = 0.94). In conclusion, in patients with AMI and MV CAD complicated by CS, the IRA-only PCI strategy seems to be associated with lower short-term, but not mid- to long-term mortality compared with MV PCI. This finding is different from the revascularization strategy recommended by current professional guidelines and suggests the need for dedicated randomized clinical trials. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
机译:尚未系统地解决了患有急性心肌梗死(AMI)复杂的急性心肌梗塞(AMI)复杂的多血管冠状动脉疾病(CAD)的最佳经皮冠状动脉介入(PCI)血运重建策略。因此,我们在这些患者梗死相关动脉(IRA)中进行了学习级别的Meta分析比较了这些患者梗死相关动脉(IRA)的PCI策略。从2000年到2016年搜索包括AMI和MV CAD患者的研究,从2000年到2016年搜索了接受初级PCI的CS。主要终点是医院/ 30天和长期(> = 6个月)死亡率。固定和随机效果模型用于分析。涉及6,068名患者的十项研究(9个前瞻性和1次追溯)达到了我们的纳入标准。仅IRA的PCI是最常用的血运重建策略(4,872名患者,80%),而MV PCI在1,196名患者中进行(20%)。与IRA仅PCI策略相比,MV PCI策略与较高的短期死亡率相关联(差距1.41,95%置信区间1.15至1.71,P = 0.008)。 MV PCI和IRA的次数策略之间的长期死亡率没有差异(赔率比1.02,95%置信区间0.65至1.58,P = 0.94)。总之,在CS的AMI和MV CAD患者中,IRA的PCI策略似乎与较低的短期相关联,但与MV PCI相比,没有中期的长期死亡率。这一发现与当前专业指南推荐的血运重建战略不同,并建议需要专门的随机临床试验。 (c)2017年Elsevier Inc.保留所有权利。

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