...
首页> 外文期刊>European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery: Official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery >Meta-analysis of 5,674 patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and drug-eluting stents or coronary artery bypass graft surgery for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis.
【24h】

Meta-analysis of 5,674 patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and drug-eluting stents or coronary artery bypass graft surgery for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis.

机译:对5,674例经皮冠状动脉介入治疗和药物洗脱支架或冠状动脉搭桥术治疗无保护的左主冠状动脉狭窄的患者进行荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

To compare the safety and efficacy of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease.MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL/CCTR, SciELO, LILACS, Google Scholar and reference lists of relevant articles were searched for clinical studies that reported outcomes at the 1-year follow-up after PCI with DES and CABG for the treatment of ULMCA stenosis. Sixteen studies (three randomized controlled trials and 13 observational studies) were identified and included a total of 5674 patients (2331 for PCI with DES and 3343 for CABG).At the 1-year follow-up, there was no significant difference between the CABG and DES groups in the risk for death (odds ratio [OR] 0.691, P = 0.051) or the composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction or stroke (OR 0.832, P = 0.258). The risk for target vessel revascularization (TVR) was significantly higher in the PCI group compared with the CABG group (OR 3.597, P < 0.001). The risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was significantly higher in the PCI group compared with the CABG group (OR 1.607, P < 0.001). A publication bias was observed regarding the outcome of death and also a considerable heterogeneity effect on the composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction or stroke and MACCE.CABG surgery remains the best option of treatment for patients with ULMCA disease, with less need of TVR and lower MACCE rates.
机译:为了比较使用药物洗脱支架(DES)的冠状动脉搭桥术(CABG)与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)在未保护的左主冠状动脉(ULMCA)疾病中的安全性和有效性。MEDLINE,EMBASE,CENTRAL / CCTR搜索SciELO,LILACS,Google Scholar和相关文章的参考列表以寻找临床研究,这些研究报告了PCI联合DES和CABG治疗ULMCA狭窄后1年随访结果。确定了16项研究(三项随机对照试验和13项观察性研究),包括5674例患者(DES合并PCI为2331例,CABG为3343例)。在1年的随访中,CABG之间无显着差异和DES组的死亡风险(比值[OR] 0.691,P = 0.051)或死亡,心肌梗塞或中风的复合终点(OR 0.832,P = 0.258)。与CABG组相比,PCI组发生靶血管血运重建(TVR)的风险显着更高(OR 3.597,P <0.001)。与CABG组相比,PCI组发生重大不良心脏和脑血管事件(MACCE)的风险显着更高(OR 1.607,P <0.001)。观察到关于死亡结局的出版物偏见,以及对死亡,心肌梗塞或中风和MACCE的复合终点有相当大的异质性影响.CABG手术仍然是ULMCA疾病患者的最佳治疗选择,对TVR和降低MACCE率。

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