首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of invasive cardiology >Comparison of six-year clinical outcome of sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents to bare-metal stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: an analysis of the RESEARCH (rapamycin-eluting stent evaluated at Rotterdam cardiology hospital) and T-SEARCH (taxus stent evaluated at Rotterdam cardiology hospital) registries.
【24h】

Comparison of six-year clinical outcome of sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents to bare-metal stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: an analysis of the RESEARCH (rapamycin-eluting stent evaluated at Rotterdam cardiology hospital) and T-SEARCH (taxus stent evaluated at Rotterdam cardiology hospital) registries.

机译:ST段升高心肌梗死的患者中西罗里木马斯和紫杉醇洗脱支架与裸金属支架的六年临床结局的比较:研究分析(RAPAMYCIN洗脱支架,评估了鹿特丹心脏病学医院)和T-搜索 (在鹿特丹心脏病医院评估的出租车支架)注册处。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Short- and long-term data showed that drug-eluting stents (DES) significantly decreased target vessel revascularization (TVR) and major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rates compared to bare-metal stents (BMS). However, conflicting long-term data remain for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to assess the 6-year clinical outcome of all patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for a de novo lesion with exclusive use of BMS, sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES). METHODS: Three PPCI cohorts (BMS = 80; SES = 92; PES = 162) were systematically followed for the occurrence of MACE. RESULTS: Very late stent thrombosis was more common after the implantation of SES as compared to PES or BMS (7.6%, 0.6%, and 0.0%, respectively; p = 0.001). Kaplan-Meier estimates indicate no statistically significant difference for mortality between the three stent types at 6 years (BMS = 25%; SES = 15%; PES = 21%; Log-rank p = 0.2). After adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics, mortality, mortality/myocardial infarction (MI), and MACE rates were significantly lower for SES compared to BMS, but not for PES (aHR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.17-0.98; aHR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.21-0.96; aHR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.17-0.72, respectively). No differences were observed between the three stent types for TVR rates. CONCLUSION: Neither SES nor PES improved safety or efficacy as compared to BMS in a STEMI population at 6 years. After adjusting, the usage of SES resulted in a significant decrease in mortality, mortality/MI and MACE rates as compared to BMS, in contrast to the usage of PES. SES and PES have a similar effectiveness and safety profile, although very late stent thrombosis was more common with SES.
机译:背景:短期和长期数据表明,与裸机支架(BMS)相比,药物洗脱支架(DES)显着降低了目标血管血运重建(TVR)和重大不良心脏事件(MACE)率。但是,对于具有ST段升高心肌梗塞(STEMI)的患者,长期数据仍然存在。目的:我们的目的是评估所有接受原发性经皮冠状动脉干预(PPCI)的6年临床结果,并在独家使用BMS,Sirolimus PeriTing Stents(SES)和Paclitaxel-perlitaxel-per-PENTENTS(PES)(PES)(PES)(PES)(PES)(PES)(PES)(PES)(PES)(PES)(PES) 。方法:对于MACE的出现,系统地遵循了三个PPCI队列(BMS = 80; SES = 92; PES = 162)。结果:与PES或BMS相比,SES植入后非常晚的支架血栓形成更为常见(分别为7.6%,0.6%和0.0%; P = 0.001)。 Kaplan-Meier估计表明,在6年时,这三种支架类型之间的死亡率没有统计学上的显着差异(BMS = 25%; SES = 15%; PES = 21%; log-Rank p = 0.2)。在调整了基线特征,死亡率,死亡率/心肌梗死(MI)和MACE率的差异之后,SES与BMS相比明显较低,但对PES的率显着降低(AHR = 0.41,95%CI:0.17-0.98; AHR = 0.44; AHR = 0.44 ,95%CI:0.21-0.96; AHR = 0.35,95%CI:0.17-0.72)。对于TVR速率,这三种支架类型之间没有观察到差异。结论:与STEMI人群相比,SES和PES均未提高安全性或功效。调整后,与BMS相比,SES的使用导致死亡率,死亡率/MI和MACE率显着降低,与PES的使用相比。 SES和PE具有相似的有效性和安全性,尽管在SES中更晚的支架血栓形成更为常见。

著录项

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