首页> 外文期刊>Cardiovascular revascularization medicine: including molecular interventions >Drug-eluting stents in patients on chronic hemodialysis: Paclitaxel-eluting stents vs. limus-eluting stents
【24h】

Drug-eluting stents in patients on chronic hemodialysis: Paclitaxel-eluting stents vs. limus-eluting stents

机译:慢性血液透析患者的药物洗脱支架:紫杉醇洗脱支架vs. limus洗脱支架

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Patients requiring chronic hemodialysis (HD) are at high risk for restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bare metal stents. Outcome data on drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in HD patients are limited and suggest superiority of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) over limus-eluting stents (LES). Methods: In total, 218 consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled. A comparison of post-PCI outcomes up to 2 years was carried out between patients receiving PES (n. = 62) and LES (n. = 156; SES n. = 112, EES n. = 44). The primary end point was 2-year major adverse cardiac events [MACE; death, Q-wave myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization (TLR)]. Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable. The overall prevalence of diabetes mellitus was 71%. On clinical follow-up to 2 years, MACE rates were similar [PES 32/51 (62.7%) vs. LES 77/132 (58.3%), p. = 0.59]; however, clinically-driven revascularization occurred more than twice as frequently in LES patients: TLR [PES 4/36 (11.1%) vs. LES 24/93 (25.8%), p. = 0.07] and target vessel revascularization [5/37 (13.5%) vs. 33/96 (34.4%), p. = 0.02]. Given that overall mortality was nominally higher for PES patients [31/50 (62.0%) vs. 61/127 (48.0%), p. = 0.09], a competing outcome analysis was implemented for TLR against mortality, which demonstrated that the trend for increased TLR with LES was no longer apparent (p. = 0.282). On multivariable adjustment, only diabetes mellitus was independently associated with TLR (use of PES was not). Conclusions: Patients on chronic HD experience high rates of clinically driven TLR despite DES implantation. Use of PES does not demonstrate a significant advantage over LES in this population.
机译:背景:需要进行慢性血液透析(HD)的患者在裸金属支架经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后发生再狭窄的风险很高。 HD患者中药物洗脱支架(DES)植入的结果数据有限,提示紫杉醇洗脱支架(PES)优于Limus洗脱支架(LES)的优势。方法:前瞻性纳入总共218例连续患者。在接受PES(n = 62)和LES(n = 156; SES n = 112,EES n = 44)的患者之间进行了长达2年的PCI后结局比较。主要终点为2年主要心脏不良事件[MACE;死亡,Q波心肌梗死和靶病变血运重建术(TLR)]。结果:基线特征具有可比性。糖尿病的总体患病率为71%。在临床随访2年后,MACE发生率相似[PES 32/51(62.7%)与LES 77/132(58.3%),p。 = 0.59];然而,由临床驱动的血运重建在LES患者中的发生率是后者的两倍以上:TLR [PES 4/36(11.1%)与LES 24/93(25.8%),第2页。 = 0.07]和目标血管血运重建[5/37(13.5%)vs. 33/96(34.4%),p。 = 0.02]。鉴于PES患者的总体死亡率名义上较高[31/50(62.0%)与61/127(48.0%),p。 = 0.09],针对死亡率进行了针对TLR的竞争性结果分析,结果表明,LES导致TLR增加的趋势不再明显(p = 0.282)。在多变量调整中,只有糖尿病与TLR独立相关(未使用PES)。结论:尽管进行了DES植入,但患有慢性HD的患者仍然有较高的临床驱动TLR发生率。在该人群中,使用PES并未显示出比LES明显的优势。

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