首页> 外文期刊>The American Journal of Cardiology >Usefulness of Discharge Resting Heart Rate to Predict Adverse Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Revascularized With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention vs Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (from the EXCEL Trial)
【24h】

Usefulness of Discharge Resting Heart Rate to Predict Adverse Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Revascularized With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention vs Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (from the EXCEL Trial)

机译:用经皮冠状动脉介入血管内血管化患者预测休息心率的有用性,以预测患有经皮冠状动脉介入的血管内血管疾病患者冠状动脉旁路嫁接(来自Excel试验)

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The prognostic impact of resting heart rate (RHR) following revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) is unknown. We aimed to assess the effect of RHR at discharge on 3-year cardiovascular outcomes following PCI and CABG for LMCAD. In the EXCEL trial, 1,905 patients with LMCAD were randomized to PCI with everolimus-eluting stents versus CABG. RHR was measured at discharge following the index hospitalization. The principal outcome measure was the composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke at 3 years. Among 1,303 patients in sinus rhythm with available ECGs, the median (IQR) discharge RHR was 72 (62to 81) bpm. Median discharge RHR was higher after CABG versus PCI (78 [IQR 70 to 86] versus 65 [IQR 59 to 74] bpm, p < 0.0001). At 3 years, 107 patients (8.2%) had a primary composite endpoint event including 61 patients (4.7%) who died. By multivariable analysis, discharge RHR assessed as a continuous variable (per 5 bpm) was an independent predictor at 3 years of the primary composite endpoint of death, MI, or stroke (hazard ratio [HR] 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06 to 1.25, p = 0.0006); the secondary composite endpoint of death, MI, stroke, or ischemia-driven revascularization at 3 years (HR 1.12, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.19, p = 0.0007); all-cause mortality (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.31, p = 0.002); and cardiovascular death (HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.33, p = 0.046). No significant interactions were present between RHR and treatment with PCI versus CABG for the primary (P-int = 0.20) or secondary (P-int = 0.47) composite endpoints. In patients with LMCAD undergoing revascularization, an increased RHR at discharge was associated with a higher risk for adverse cardiovascular outcomes at 3 years, irrespective of treatment modality. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
机译:左侧冠状动脉疾病(LMCAD)患者经皮冠状动脉介入(PCI)或冠状动脉旁路接枝(CABG)术后休息心率(RHR)的预后影响是未知的。我们的旨在评估rhR在LMCAD后3年和CABG后的3年心血管结果排放的影响。在Excel试验中,1,905名LMCAD患者随机用Everolimus洗脱支架随机化。在指数住院后,RHR在放电时测量。主要结果措施是死亡,心肌梗死(MI)或3年中卒中的复合终点。在具有可用ECG的窦性心律的1,303名患者中,中位数(IQR)排放RHR为72(62至81)BPM。在CABG与PCI相比(78 [IQR 70至86]对65 [IQR 59至74] BPM,P <0.0001)后,中位放电RHR更高。 3年,107名患者(8.2%)有一个主要的复合终点事件,包括61名患者(4.7%)。通过多变量分析,作为连续变量(每5bpm)评估的放电RHR是死亡,MI或中风初级复合终点的3年的独立预测因子(危险比[HR] 1.15,95%置信区间[CI] 1.06至1.25,p = 0.0006);死亡,Mi,中风或缺血驱动的二级复合终点,3年(HR 1.12,95%CI 1.05至1.19,P = 0.0007);全因死亡率(HR 1.18,95%CI 1.07至1.31,P = 0.002);和心血管死亡(HR 1.16,95%CI 1.00至1.33,P = 0.046)。 rhR与PCI与CABG的治疗不具有显着的相互作用,用于初级(P-INT = 0.20)或次级(P-INT = 0.47)复合端点。在LMCAD患者接受血运重建中,随着治疗方式的3年来,出院时的rHR的增加与不良心血管结果的风险更高。 (c)2019 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