摘要
目的单中心前瞻性随机比较急性下壁心肌梗死(AIMI)患者施行 PCI 前应用Guardwire Plus 与 Diver CE 两种血栓去除装置的效果。方法采用单中心前瞻性随机方法比较发病<12 h、TIMI 血流0~1级 AIMI 患者施行直接 PCI 前应用 Guardwire Plus 与 Diver CE 两种血栓去除装置的有效性。主要终点是 PCI 后1 h 内 ST 段回落程度。结果 122例患者人选本研究。Diver CE 组和 Guardwire Plus 组的年龄[(59.6±14)岁比(60.1±13)岁]、男性(82%比84%)、糖尿病(31%比28%)、既往冠心病(25%比23%)、症状发作到直接 PCI 时间[(550±185)rain比(345±180)min]和应用血小板膜糖蛋白Ⅱb/Ⅲa受体拮抗剂(11%比13%)等基线资料均匹配。两组 ST 段回落(70%)率(57%比59%)、慢血流和无再流发生率(8%比7%)、TIMI 血流3级率(95%比97%)和心肌染色血流3级率(70%比72%)差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。术后1个月临床结果显示,左心室射血分数[(0.54±0.12)比(0.53±0.11)]、死亡(3%比3%)、再次心肌梗死(2%比0)和靶血管重建(2%比2%)差异也无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论与 Guardwire Plus 装置比较,在 AIMI 患者施行支架术前应用 Diver CE 装置去除血栓,同样可以降低远端栓塞、促进 ST 段回落并改善心肌灌注。
Objective In this randomized prospective single-center study, we compared the efficacy of adjunctive thrombeetomy using Diver CE device (Invatec, Italy ) versus Guardwire Plus device (Medtranie, USA) before pereutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with 〈 12 h acute inferior myocardial infarction (AIMI) and Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow grade 0 to 1. The primary end point was the magnitude of ST-segment resolution after PCI. Methods A total of 122 patients (61 in Diver CE group and 61 in Guardwire Plus group) were studied. The magnitude of ST-segment resolution, myocardial blush grade and slow flow or no re-flow 1 h after PCI were measured in study patients. Results Baseline characteristics were similar between groups: age (59. 6 s 14 years vs. 60. 1 s 13 years), males (82% vs. 84%), diabetes (31%vs. 28% ), previous coronary artery disease (25% vs. 23%), onset-to-angiogram (350±185 min vs, 345 s 180 min), and glycoprotein Ⅱ b/Ⅲ a inhibitor use ( 11% vs. 13%, all P 〉 0. 05 ). The magnitude of ST-segment resolution was also similar in these two groups : ST- segment resolution 〉70% (57% vs. 59%, P 〉0. 05). Slow flow / no reflow rate (8% vs. 7% ), TIMI flow grade 3 (95% vs. 97% ) and myocardial blush grade 3 (70% vs. 72% ) post PCI were not different in the groups (all P 〉0. 05). Left ventricle ejection fraction (0. 54 ±0. 12 vs. 0. 53 ±0. 11 ), death (3% vs. 3% ), re-myocardial infarction (2% vs. 0) and target vessel revascularization (2% vs. 2% ) at one month post PCI were comparable ( all P 〉 0. 05 ). Conclusion Efficacy of removing thrombus burden with Diver CE device or Guardwire Plus device was similar in patients with 〈 12 h acute inferior myocardial infarction.
出处
《中华心血管病杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2007年第5期461-465,共5页
Chinese Journal of Cardiology
关键词
心肌梗塞
支架
血栓去除装置
Myocardial infarction
Stents
Thrombectomy devices