首页> 外文期刊>EuroIntervention: journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology >Two-year outcomes of everolimus vs. paclitaxel-eluting stent for the treatment of unprotected left main lesions: A propensity score matching comparison of patients included in the French Left Main Taxus (FLM Taxus) and the LEft MAin Xience (LEMAX) registries
【24h】

Two-year outcomes of everolimus vs. paclitaxel-eluting stent for the treatment of unprotected left main lesions: A propensity score matching comparison of patients included in the French Left Main Taxus (FLM Taxus) and the LEft MAin Xience (LEMAX) registries

机译:依维莫司vs紫杉醇洗脱支架治疗无保护的左主干病变的两年结局:倾向评分匹配比较法国左主干红素(FLM Taxus)和LEft MAin Xience(LEMAX)登记的患者

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Aims: With newer drug-eluting stents (DES), PCI has appeared as an acceptable alternative to cardiac surgery in the treatment of unprotected left main (ULM) lesions. Using data from the French Left Main Taxus and the LEft MAin Xience registries, we compared two-year outcomes in consecutive patients from 2003- 2008 using everolimus-eluting stents (EES) vs. paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES). Methods and results: We performed a matched comparison according to SYNTAX score, distal LM stenosis, provisional side-branch T-stenting and single stent use, focusing on the primary endpoints of target vessel MI (TVMI) and target vessel failure (TVF). After propensity score matching, there were 172 patients in each group. There was no difference in gender (76.5% male), age (69.5±11.3 years), diabetes (26.2% vs. 24.4%, p=0.71), NSTEMI (40.7% vs. 40.7%, p=1), or LVEF <40% (11.0% vs. 6.7%, p=0.22). Patients with distal LM lesions (75.9%) were treated using provisional T-stenting in 91.1%. The side branch was stented in 22% of all patients (p=0.51). Cumulative two-year events showed significant differences in TVMI (9.9% vs. 4.1%, p=0.04) and TVF (16.3% vs. 7.6%, p=0.01) for PES and EES, respectively. Conclusions: ULM stenting with EES is safer and more effective than PES with a reduction in TLF by 53% at two years.
机译:目的:使用较新的药物洗脱支架(DES),PCI已成为治疗无保护的左主干(ULM)病变的心脏手术的可接受替代方案。使用来自法国左主要红豆杉和左欣欣斯州登记处的数据,我们比较了使用依维莫司洗脱支架(EES)与紫杉醇洗脱支架(PES)的2003-2008年连续患者的两年结局。方法和结果:我们根据SYNTAX评分,远端LM狭窄,临时侧支T型支架置入和单支架使用进行了匹配比较,重点是目标血管MI(TVMI)和目标血管衰竭(TVF)的主要终点。倾向评分匹配后,每组172例患者。性别(76.5%男性),年龄(69.5±11.3岁),糖尿病(26.2%对24.4%,p = 0.71),NSTEMI(40.7%对40.7%,p = 1)或LVEF无差异<40%(11.0%vs.6.7%,p = 0.22)。 LM远端病变患者(75.9%)接受了临时T型支架治疗,占91.1%。在所有患者中,有22%植入了侧支(p = 0.51)。两年的累积事件显示,PES和EES的TVMI(9.9%vs. 4.1%,p = 0.04)和TVF(16.3%vs. 7.6%,p = 0.01)分别存在显着差异。结论:EES的ULM支架比PES更安全,更有效,两年内TLF降低了53%。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
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