首页> 外文期刊>European Heart Journal: The Journal of the European Society of Cardiology >Long-term clinical follow-up of the multicentre, randomized study to test immunosuppressive therapy with oral prednisone for the prevention of restenosis after percutaneous coronary interventions: Cortisone plus BMS or des veRsus BMS alone to EliminAte Restenosis (CEREA-DES)
【24h】

Long-term clinical follow-up of the multicentre, randomized study to test immunosuppressive therapy with oral prednisone for the prevention of restenosis after percutaneous coronary interventions: Cortisone plus BMS or des veRsus BMS alone to EliminAte Restenosis (CEREA-DES)

机译:多中心,长期研究的长期临床随访,以测试口服泼尼松的免疫抑制疗法在经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后预防再狭窄的作用:可的松加BMS或Des veRsus BMS单独用于EliminAte再狭窄(CEREA-DES)

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

AimsTo analyse the clinical outcome at 4 years in patients with coronary artery disease treated with bare metal stents (BMS) vs. BMS and oral prednisone, or drug-eluting stents (DES), all assuming similar adjunctive medical treatment.Methods and resultsFive Italian hospitals enrolled 375 non-diabetic, ischaemic patients without contraindications to dual anti-platelet treatment or corticosteroid therapy in a randomized controlled study. The primary endpoint was the event-free survival of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and recurrence of ischaemia needing repeated target vessel revascularization at 1 year, and this was significantly lower in the BMS group (80.8%) compared with the prednisone (88.0%) and DES group (88.8%, P = 0.04 and 0.006, respectively). The long-term analysis of the primary endpoint was a pre-specified aim of the trial, and was performed at 1447 days (median, IQ range = 1210-1641). Patients receiving BMS alone had significantly lower event-free survival (75.3%) compared with 84.1% in the prednisone group (HR: 0.447; 95% CI: 0.25-0.80, P = 0.007) and 80.6% in DES patients (HR: 0.519; 95% CI: 0.29-0.93, P = 0.03). Prednisone-treated patients did not develop new treatment-related clinical problems. Drug-eluting stents patients suffered more very late stent thrombosis as a cause of spontaneous myocardial infarction. The need for target vessel revascularization remained lower in the prednisone and DES groups (13.6 and 15.2%, respectively), compared with BMS (23.2%).ConclusionsThe clinical benefits of prednisone compared with BMS only persisted almost unchanged at 4 years. Drug-eluting stents performed better than BMS at long-term, although the advantages observed at 1 year were in part attenuated because of the occurrence of very late stent thrombosis and late revascularizations.Clinical Trial NCT 00369356.
机译:目的分析使用裸金属支架(BMS)对比BMS和口服泼尼松或药物洗脱支架(DES)治疗的冠状动脉疾病患者在4年时的临床结局,所有方法均假设采用类似的辅助治疗方法和结果五家意大利医院在一项随机对照研究中,招募了375名无双重抗血小板治疗或皮质类固醇治疗禁忌症的非糖尿病缺血性患者。主要终点是无事件生存的心血管死亡,心肌梗塞和局部缺血的复发,需要在1年时反复进行靶血管血运重建,与泼尼松(88.0%)相比,BMS组(80.8%)的这一水平显着降低和DES组(分别为88.8%,P = 0.04和0.006)。主要终点的长期分析是该研究的预定目标,于1447天进行(中位数,IQ范围= 1210-1641)。单独接受BMS的患者的无事件生存率(75.3%)明显低于泼尼松组的84.1%(HR:0.447; 95%CI:0.25-0.80,P = 0.007)和DES患者的80.6%(HR:0.519) ; 95%CI:0.29-0.93,P = 0.03)。泼尼松治疗的患者未出现新的治疗相关的临床问题。药物洗脱支架患者由于自发性心肌梗塞而在支架内血栓形成的后期发生率更高。与BMS组(23.2%)相比,泼尼松组和DES组对目标血管的血运重建需求仍然较低(分别为13.6%和15.2%)。结论泼尼松与BMS相比的临床获益仅在4年时几乎保持不变。长期而言,药物洗脱支架的性能优于BMS,尽管在1年时观察到的优势在一定程度上减弱了,因为发生了很晚的支架血栓和晚期的血运重建。临床试验NCT 00369356。

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