首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Kidney Diseases: The official journal of the National Kidney Foundation >Clinical and angiographic outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention with sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in hemodialysis patients.
【24h】

Clinical and angiographic outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention with sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in hemodialysis patients.

机译:西罗莫司洗脱支架与裸金属支架经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后在血液透析患者中​​的临床和血管造影结果。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention for hemodialysis patients has been hampered by the high rate of adverse cardiac events. Our aim was to investigate whether sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) improve clinical outcomes of hemodialysis patients compared with bare-metal stents (BMSs). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 123 consecutive patients on hemodialysis therapy treated with either an SES or BMS. There were 56 patients with 68 lesions treated with SESs between August 2004 and April 2006 (SES group) and 67 patients with 71 lesions treated with BMSs 4 years before approval of SESs in Japan (BMS group). PREDICTOR: SES and BMS implantation for hemodialysis patients with coronary artery disease. OUTCOMES & MEASUREMENTS: Follow-up angiography was performed at 6 to 8 months and clinical follow-up was obtained at 9 months after the procedure. Late lumen loss and major adverse cardiac events, including all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and target-lesion revascularization, were investigated. RESULTS: Clinical follow-up was obtained in all patients. Angiographic follow-up was obtained in 50 patients (89.3%) in the SES group and 50 patients (74.6%) in the BMS group. The SES group had more complex lesions than the BMS group. Quantitative angiographic analysis showed a significant difference for in-stent late lumen loss (SES, 0.62 +/- 0.75 mm; BMS, 1.07 +/- 0.75 mm; P = 0.003). Of angiographic restenosis lesions analyzed, a focal restenotic pattern was observed more frequently in the SES group than the BMS group (SES, 87.5%; BMS, 23.8%; P < 0.001). The rate of major adverse cardiac events was significantly lower in the SES group (n = 14; 25.0%) than the BMS group (n = 26; 38.9%; log-rank P = 0.02). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study design, small sample size, and a single-center study. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical and angiographic data in the present study suggest that SESs are more effective than BMSs in hemodialysis patients.
机译:背景:高水平的不良心脏事件阻碍了血液透析患者的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗。我们的目的是研究与裸金属支架(BMS)相比,西罗莫司洗脱支架(SES)是否能改善血液透析患者的临床疗效。研究设计:回顾性研究。地点和参与者:连续123例接受SES或BMS血液透析治疗的患者。在2004年8月至2006年4月之间,有56例患者接受了SES的治疗,有68个病灶(SES组),而在日本批准SES治疗前4年,有67例患者接受了BMS的71个病灶(BMS组)。预测:SES和BMS植入可用于冠心病患者的血液透析患者。结果与测量:术后6-8个月进行了血管造影,术后9个月进行了临床随访。研究了晚期管腔丢失和主要的不良心脏事件,包括全因死亡,心肌梗塞和靶病变血运重建。结果:所有患者均获得了临床随访。 SES组50例(89.3%)和BMS组50例(74.6%)获得了血管造影随访。 SES组比BMS组具有更复杂的病变。定量血管造影分析显示支架内晚期管腔丢失有显着差异(SES,0.62 +/- 0.75 mm; BMS,1.07 +/- 0.75 mm; P = 0.003)。在所分析的血管造影再狭窄病变中,与BMS组相比,SES组观察到局灶性再狭窄的频率更高(SES,87.5%; BMS,23.8%; P <0.001)。 SES组的主要不良心脏事件发生率(n = 14; 25.0%)显着低于BMS组(n = 26; 38.9%;对数秩P = 0.02)。局限性:回顾性研究设计,小样本量和单中心研究。结论:本研究的临床和血管造影数据表明,在血液透析患者中​​,SES比BMS更有效。

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