IMR OpenIR
Comparison of the Efficacy of Drug-eluting Stents Versus Bare-metal Stents for the Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease
其他题名Comparison of the Efficacy of Drug-eluting Stents Versus Bare-metal Stents for the Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease
Wang XiaoZeng1; Xu Kai1; Li Yi1; Jing QuanMin1; Liu HaiWei1; Zhao Xin1; Wang Geng1; Wang Bin1; Ma YingYan1; Chen ShaoLiang2; Han YaLing1
2015
发表期刊Chinese Medical Journal
ISSN0366-6999
卷号128期号:6页码:721-726
摘要Background: Recent studies reported that percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation was safe and feasible for the treatment of left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease in select patients. However, it is unclear whether drug-eluting stents (DESs) have better outcomes in patients with LMCA disease compared with bare-metal stent (BMS) during long-term follow-up in Chinese populations. Methods: From a perspective multicenter registry, 1136 consecutive patients, who underwent BMS or DES implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis, were divided into two groups: 1007 underwent DES implantation, and 129 underwent BMS implantation. The primary outcome was the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including cardiovascular (CV) death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 5 years postimplantation. Results: Patients in the DES group were older and more likely to have hyperlipidemia and bifurcation lesions. They had smaller vessels and longer lesions than patients in the BMS group. In the adjusted cohort of patients, the DES group had significantly lower 5 years rates of MACE (19.4% vs. 31.8%, P = 0.022), CV death (7.0% vs. 14.7%, P = 0.045), and MI (5.4% vs. 12.4%, P = 0.049) than the BMS group. There were no significant differences in the rate of TLR (10.9% vs. 17.8%, P = 0.110) and stent thrombosis (4.7% vs. 3.9%, P = 0.758). The rates of MACE (80.6% vs. 68.2%, P = 0.023), CV death (93.0% vs. 85.3%, P = 0.045), TLR (84.5% vs. 72.1%, P = 0.014), and MI (89.9% vs. 80.6%, P = 0.029) free survival were significantly higher in the DES group than in the BMS group. When the propensity score was included as a covariate in the Cox model, the adjusted hazard ratios for the risk of CV death and MI were 0.41 (95% confidence interval CI: 0.21-0.63, P = 0.029) and 0.29 (95% CI: 0.08-0.92, P = 0.037), respectively. Conclusions: DES implantation was associated with more favorable clinical outcomes than BMS implantation for the treatment of LMCA disease even though there was no significant difference in the rate of TLR between the two groups.
其他摘要Background: Recent studies reported that percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation was safe and feasible for the treatment of left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease in select patients. However, it is unclear whether drug-eluting stents (DESs) have better outcomes in patients with LMCA disease compared with bare-metal stent (BMS) during long-term follow-up in Chinese populations. Methods: From a perspective multicenter registry, 1136 consecutive patients, who underwent BMS or DES implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis, were divided into two groups: 1007 underwent DES implantation, and 129 underwent BMS implantation. The primary outcome was the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including cardiovascular (CV) death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 5 years postimplantation. Results: Patients in the DES group were older and more likely to have hyperlipidemia and bifurcation lesions. They had smaller vessels and longer lesions than patients in the BMS group. In the adjusted cohort of patients, the DES group had significantly lower 5 years rates of MACE (19.4% vs. 31.8%, P = 0.022), CV death (7.0% vs. 14.7%, P = 0.045), and MI (5.4% vs. 12.4%, P = 0.049) than the BMS group. There were no significant differences in the rate of TLR (10.9% vs. 17.8%, P = 0.110) and stent thrombosis (4.7% vs. 3.9%, P = 0.758). The rates of MACE (80.6% vs. 68.2%, P = 0.023), CV death (93.0% vs. 85.3%, P = 0.045), TLR (84.5% vs. 72.1%, P = 0.014), and MI (89.9% vs. 80.6%, P = 0.029) free survival were significantly higher in the DES group than in the BMS group. When the propensity score was included as a covariate in the Cox model, the adjusted hazard ratios for the risk of CV death and MI were 0.41 (95% confidence interval CI : 0.21–0.63, P = 0.029) and 0.29 (95% CI : 0.08–0.92, P = 0.037), respectively. Conclusions: DES implantation was associated with more favorable clinical outcomes than BMS implantation for the treatment of LMCA disease even though there was no significant difference in the rate of TLR between the two groups.
关键词Bare-metal Stent Medicine R Drug-eluting Stent Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
收录类别CSCD
语种英语
CSCD记录号CSCD:5363378
引用统计
被引频次:3[CSCD]   [CSCD记录]
文献类型期刊论文
条目标识符http://ir.imr.ac.cn/handle/321006/148512
专题中国科学院金属研究所
作者单位1.中国科学院金属研究所
2.中国科学院南京地理与湖泊研究所
推荐引用方式
GB/T 7714
Wang XiaoZeng,Xu Kai,Li Yi,et al. Comparison of the Efficacy of Drug-eluting Stents Versus Bare-metal Stents for the Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease[J]. Chinese Medical Journal,2015,128(6):721-726.
APA Wang XiaoZeng.,Xu Kai.,Li Yi.,Jing QuanMin.,Liu HaiWei.,...&Han YaLing.(2015).Comparison of the Efficacy of Drug-eluting Stents Versus Bare-metal Stents for the Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease.Chinese Medical Journal,128(6),721-726.
MLA Wang XiaoZeng,et al."Comparison of the Efficacy of Drug-eluting Stents Versus Bare-metal Stents for the Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease".Chinese Medical Journal 128.6(2015):721-726.
条目包含的文件
条目无相关文件。
个性服务
推荐该条目
保存到收藏夹
查看访问统计
导出为Endnote文件
谷歌学术
谷歌学术中相似的文章
[Wang XiaoZeng]的文章
[Xu Kai]的文章
[Li Yi]的文章
百度学术
百度学术中相似的文章
[Wang XiaoZeng]的文章
[Xu Kai]的文章
[Li Yi]的文章
必应学术
必应学术中相似的文章
[Wang XiaoZeng]的文章
[Xu Kai]的文章
[Li Yi]的文章
相关权益政策
暂无数据
收藏/分享
所有评论 (0)
暂无评论
 

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。