首页> 外文期刊>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions: Official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions >Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation vs. minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) in patients with left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis.
【24h】

Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation vs. minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) in patients with left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis.

机译:冠状动脉左前降支狭窄患者的药物洗脱支架植入与微创直接冠状动脉搭桥术(MIDCAB)的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

The aim of this study was to assess the effects of percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DESs) versus minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery in the management of patients with proximal left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery stenosis. Until recent years, despite the advantages of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) with bare metal stent implantation, such as shorter hospital stays and recovery time, MIDCAB showed better results with regard to the need for repeated intervention in the target vessel than PTCA with proximal LAD lesions. Symptomatic patients (n = 189) were randomly assigned to DES group (n = 119) and MIDCAB group (n = 70). Patients with an isolated high-grade lesion (stenosis of > or = 70% of the luminal diameter) in the proximal LAD coronary artery (from the ostium to the first diagonal branch) were included in this study. During the 6-month follow-up period, 1.7% (n = 2) in the DES group needed repeated revascularization procedures for target lesion revascularization compared with 5.9% (n = 4) in the MIDCAB group (P = 0.196). The rates of death and myocardial infarction were similar in both groups [DES 0.0% (n = 0) vs. MIDCAB 2.9% (n = 2), P = 0.135; DES 1.7% (n = 2) vs. MIDCAB 2.9% (n = 2), P = 0.627; respectively] during 6 months of follow-up. In-hospital length of stay was significantly shorter in the DES group compared with the MIDCAB group (5.8 +/- 2.1 days vs. 8.9 +/- 2.6 days; P = 0.001). DES implantation and MIDCAB surgery showed similar rates of myocardial infarction, the need for repeated revascularization, and death during 6 months of follow-up. However, DES implantation resulted in lower average number of hospital stays and similar postoperative complications.
机译:这项研究的目的是评估使用药物洗脱支架(DESs)进行的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与微创直接冠状动脉搭桥术(MIDCAB)手术在管理左前降支(LAD)冠状动脉近端狭窄患者中的效果。直到最近几年,尽管经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术(PTCA)与裸金属支架植入的优势,例如缩短住院时间和恢复时间,但MIDCAB在需要对目标血管进行重复干预方面显示出比具有近端PTCA更好的结果LAD病变。有症状的患者(n = 189)被随机分为DES组(n = 119)和MIDCAB组(n = 70)。本研究包括近端LAD冠状动脉(从口到第一个对角分支)患有孤立的高级别病变(狭窄度大于或等于管腔直径的70%)的患者。在6个月的随访期间,DES组需要1.7%(n = 2)的重复血运重建术以进行目标病变血运重建,而MIDCAB组为5.9%(n = 4)(P = 0.196)。两组的死亡率和心肌梗死率相似[DES 0.0%(n = 0)vs MIDCAB 2.9%(n = 2),P = 0.135; DES 1.7%(n = 2),而MIDCAB 2.9%(n = 2),P = 0.627;分别在6个月的随访期间。与MIDCAB组相比,DES组的住院时间显着缩短(5.8 +/- 2.1天与8.9 +/- 2.6天; P = 0.001)。 DES植入和MIDCAB手术显示相似的心肌梗塞发生率,需要再次血运重建以及随访6个月内死亡。但是,DES植入导致平均住院次数减少,术后并发症也类似。

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