...
首页> 外文期刊>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions: Official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions >Comparison of 2-year clinical outcomes between zotarolimus-, sirolimus-, and paclitaxel-eluting stents in real life clinical practice
【24h】

Comparison of 2-year clinical outcomes between zotarolimus-, sirolimus-, and paclitaxel-eluting stents in real life clinical practice

机译:在现实生活中,佐他莫司,西罗莫司和紫杉醇洗脱支架的两年临床疗效比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: There are few studies comparing the long-term efficacy and safety of the zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) with sirolimus- (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in the unselected cohorts that were subject to real life clinical practice. Methods: Total 2,769 patient who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the three drug-eluting stents (DES) between April 2006 and July 2008 were analyzed retrospectively. A total of 1,152 patients were treated with SES, 810 with PES, and 807 with ZES. The primary analysis endpoint was cumulative rate of target-lesion failure (TLF) at 24 months, defined as the composite of cardiac death, target-vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), and target-lesion revascularization (TLR). Results: At 24 months, the incidence of TLF was significantly lower in the SES group compared with the ZES (7.6% vs. 11.3%, HR = 0.66, CI = 0.49-0.88, P = 0.005) or the PES group (7.6% vs. 10.2%, HR = 0.74, CI = 0.55-0.99, P = 0.048), while similar between the PES and the ZES groups (HR = 0.89, CI = 0.66-1.20, P = 0.443). The difference was mostly driven by higher rate of TLR in the ZES and PES groups compared with the SES group, mostly within the first year post-PCI. However, the rate of hard endpoints (cardiac death or nonfatal MI) was similar among the three groups. These results were reproduced in the propensity score-matched cohort.Conclusions: This observational study shows that the use of SES is superior to PES or ZES for the TLF in the overall and matched analysis.
机译:背景:很少有研究在未经选择的人群中比较佐他莫司洗脱支架(ZES)与西罗莫司(SES)和紫杉醇洗脱支架(PES)的长期疗效和安全性,这些人群均接受了现实生活中的临床实践。方法:回顾性分析2006年4月至2008年7月间共使用3种药物洗脱支架(DES)成功行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的2769例患者。共有1,152例患者接受了SES,810例PES和807例ZES。主要分析终点为24个月时目标病变失败的累积率(TLF),定义为心源性死亡,目标血管相关性心肌梗塞(MI)和目标病变血运重建(TLR)的综合。结果:在24个月时,SES组的TLF发生率明显低于ZES(7.6%比11.3%,HR = 0.66,CI = 0.49-0.88,P = 0.005)或PES组(7.6%) vs. 10.2%,HR = 0.74,CI = 0.55-0.99,P = 0.048),而PES和ZES组之间相似(HR = 0.89,CI = 0.66-1.20,P = 0.443)。与SES组相比,ZES和PES组的TLR发生率较高,主要是在PCI后的第一年内,导致了差异。但是,三组之间硬性终点(心脏死亡或非致命性心肌梗死)的发生率相似。结论:这项观察性研究表明,在整体分析和匹配分析中,对于TLF,SES的使用优于PES或ZES。

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