...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of cardiac failure >Comparison of Angiographic Outcomes after Drug-eluting Stents and Bare-metal Stents in Patients with Cardiac Allograft Vasculopathy: A Metanalysis
【24h】

Comparison of Angiographic Outcomes after Drug-eluting Stents and Bare-metal Stents in Patients with Cardiac Allograft Vasculopathy: A Metanalysis

机译:心脏异种移植血管病患者药用支架和裸金属支架后血管造影结果的比较:一种元分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

BackgroundCoronary Allograft Vasculopathy (CAV) is a major determinant of long term survival after cardiac transplantation and remains one of the leading causes of death after the first year of orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT). Percutaneous revascularization is an option for amenable lesions with either drug-eluting stents (DES) or bare-metal stents (BMS). Choice of stent is dependent on patient and angiographic characteristics. Previous studies comparing the two stent subtypes have shown inconsistent results and thus we decided to do a meta-analysis to evaluate the net clinical effect. MethodsPubMed, Medline & EMBASE were queried for all English articles from 1993 to 2017. Inclusion criteria were patients with CAV undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with either DES or BMS with follow up angiography at 1 year. Primary outcome was In-stent restenosis (ISR): defined as more than 50% stenosis of the stent diameter angiographically. Secondary outcome was mortality. Outcomes were analyzed in two groups: Patient-based analysis and Lesion-based analysis. Data were pooled with absolute event rate and metanalysis of the outcomes was performed using a weighted random effects model in RevMAN 5.0. ResultsSeven studies including a total of 526 angiographic lesions (BMS 267; 50.7%) and 268 patients were analyzed. On lesion-based analysis, mean incidence of ISR in the BMS group vs the DES group was 31% vs 10.2% (RR 0.36; 95% CI 0.19–0.69; p=0.002). No difference in mortality was observed between the two groups (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.16–0.46; p=0.86). Forest-plots for the outcomes are shown below. ConclusionOur analysis suggests that when compared with BMS implantation, DES have a lower rate of in-stent restenosis but offer no reduction in mortality at 1 year.
机译:背景加殖症同种异体移植血管病(CAV)是心脏移植后长期存活的主要决定因素,仍然是原位心脏移植的第一年后死亡原因之一(OHT)。经皮血运重建是具有药物洗脱支架(DES)或裸金属支架(BMS)的可携带病变的选择。支架的选择取决于患者和血管造影特征。以前的研究比较了两个支架亚型的研究表明了不一致的结果,因此我们决定进行荟萃分析以评估净临床效果。方法商品,从1993年到2017年的所有英语文章查询了Medline和Embase。纳入标准是CAV的患者,患有经皮冠状动脉干预的患者,在1年后与DES或BMS进行后续血管造影。主要结果是支架再狭窄(ISR):定义为支架直径的50%以上的狭窄血管造影。次要结果是死亡率。两组分析结果:基于患者的分析和基于病变的分析。通过Revman 5.0中的加权随机效果模型进行绝对事件率汇集了数据的绝对事件率,并且使用加权随机效应模型进行了结果。结果,分析了总共526例血管造影病变(BMS 267; 50.7%)和268名患者的研究。基于病变的分析,BMS组中ISR的平均发病率VS组为31%Vs10.2%(RR 0.36; 95%CI 0.19-0.69; P = 0.002)。两组之间观察到死亡率的差异(RR 0.86; 95%CI 0.16-0.46; P = 0.86)。结果的森林图如下所示。结论Rour分析表明,与BMS植入相比,DES具有较低的支架再狭窄率,但在1年内没有降低死亡率。

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