期刊文献+

采用冠状动脉造影和临床特征评分系统对无保护左主干支架术老年患者预后的预测 被引量:3

Prognostic value by combination of angiographic and clinical characteristics in stented patients with unprotected left main coronary artery lesion
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的比较联用冠状动脉造影和临床特征的整体风险分层系统( Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery, SYNTAX)评分和临床特征欧洲心脏手术危险评估系统(The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation, EuroSCORE)在无保护左主干(ULMCA)病变老年人支架置入术后的预测价值。方法老年ULMCA病变接受支架术治疗105例,根据有无主要不良心脏事件(MACE)分两组,分析GRC评分与SYNTAX积分和EuroSCORE评估方法对MACE的预测价值。结果EuroSCORE评分MACE组与非MACE组分别为(2.0±2.3)分和(6.5±2.9)分(t=8.18,P=0.002);左主干伴3支病变和左主干分叉病变的比例高(z。值分别为8.96、6.96,P值为0.011和0.008);MACE发生率GRC高危组55.9%(19/34),较中危组20.5%(9/44)和低危组7.4%(2/27)高(Х^2=19.77,P=0.001)。GRC对MACE的预测价值优于SYNTAX积分和EuroSCORE积分,GRC、SYNTAX积分及EuroSCORE的曲线下面积〈95%cJ分别为0.821(0.730~0.912)、0.586(0.462~0.709)和0.631(0506~0.757)],GRC与SYNTAX积分和EuroSCORE比较,差异有统计学意义(Z值分别为3.29、2.63,P〈0.01、P〈0.05)。结论GRC评分较SYNTAX积分和EuroSCORE更好的预测ULMCA病变老年患者的MACE。 Objective To compare the predicting values for Prognosis among Global Risk Classification (GRS), Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score, the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) in patients who received stenting because of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) lesion. Methods Totally 105 successive elderly patients with ULMCA lesion who received stenting were divided into 2 groups: with and without main adverse cardiac events (MACE). The clinical and angiographic characteristics were analyzed and then compared among GRC, SYNTAX score and EuroSCORE. Results As compared with none MACE group, MACE group had higher EuroSCORE score (2.0±2.3 vs. 6.5±2.9, t=8.18,P=0. 002), and more trivessel disease and left main bifurcation lesion (Z2 = 8.96, 6.96, P = 0. 011, P = 0. 008). High risk GRC showed more MACE than medium or low risk GRC [55.9% (19/34) vs. 20.5%(9/44), 7.4%(2/27), )%2 =19.77, P=0.001]. AUC(95%CI )of GRC, SYNTAX score and EuroSCORE were CO. 821(0. 730-0. 912), 0. 586(0. 462-0. 709) and 0. 631 (0506-0. 757)], respectively. Compared with SYNTAX score and EuroSCORE, GRC was superior in the MACE predicting value (Z=3.29, 2.63, P〈0.01 or P〈 0.05). Conclusions Compared with SYNTAX score and EuroSCORE, GRC provides better predicting value in terms of MACE for elderly patients with ULMCA lesion receiving stenting.
出处 《中华老年医学杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2012年第6期454-457,共4页 Chinese Journal of Geriatrics
关键词 冠心病 血管成形术 经腔 经皮冠状动脉 Coronary disease Angioplasty, transluminal, percutaneous coronary
  • 相关文献

参考文献15

  • 1Stone P,Goldschlager N. Left main coronary artery disease:review and appraisal[J].Cardiovascular Medicine,1979.165-177.
  • 2DeMots H,Rosch J,McAnulty J. Left main coronary artery disease[J].Cardiovascular Clinics,1977.201-211.
  • 3Taylor H,Deumite N,Chairman B. Asymptomatic left main coronary artery disease in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) registry[J].Circulation,1989.1171-1179.doi:10.1161/01.CIR.79.6.1171.
  • 4Cohen M,Gorlin R. Main left coronary arterydisease:clinical experience from 1964-1974[J].Circulation,1975.275-285.
  • 5Serruys PW,Morice MC,Kappetein AP. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronaryartery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease[J].New England Journal of Medicine,2009,(10):961-972.doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0804626.
  • 6Park SJ,Kim YH,Park DW. Randomized trial of stents versus bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease[J].New England Journal of Medicine,2011.1718-1727.
  • 7Wijns W,Kolh P,Danchin N. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization:the task force on myocardial revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)[J].European Heart Journal,2010.2501-2555.
  • 8Nashef SAM,Roques F,Michel P. The EuroSCORE Study Group.European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE)[J].European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery,1999.9-13.
  • 9CapodannoD,Miano M,Cincotta G. EuroSCORE refines the predictive ability of SYNTAX score in patients undergoing left main percutaneous coronary intervention[J].American Heart Journal,2010.103-109.
  • 10Hanley JA,McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases[J].Rasiology,1983.839-843.

二级参考文献11

  • 1李志忠,SidneyL,JuergensCP.老年患者无保护左主干冠状动脉旋磨及支架治疗[J].中华老年医学杂志,2004,23(11):828-829. 被引量:4
  • 2Lee MS, Yang T, Dhoot J, et al. Meta-analysis of clinical studies comparing coronary artery bypass grafting with percutaneous coronary intervention and drug-eluting stents in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery narrowings. Am J Cardiol, 2010,105 : 1070-1075.
  • 3Boudriot E, Thiele H, Walther T, et al. Randomized comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention with sirolimus-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting in unprotected left main stem stenosis. J Am Coil Cardinl.2011.57. 538-545.
  • 4Valgimigli M, Malagutti P, ranillo GAR,et al. Single- vessel versus bifurcation stenting for the treatment of distal left main coronary artery disease in the drug- eluting stenting era. Clinical and angiographic insights into the Rapamyein- Eluting Stent Evaluated at Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital ( RESEARCH ) and Taxus-Stent Evaluated at Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (T-SEARCH) registries. Am Heart J, 2006,152 : 896-902.
  • 5Mehilli J,Kastrati J, Byrne RA, et al. for the ISAR- LEFT-MAIN ( intracoronary stenting and angiographic results : drug-eluting stents for unprotected coronary left main lesions ) study investigators, paclitaxet versus sirolimus-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2009,53:1760-1768.
  • 6Kandzari DE,Colombo A,Park SJ, et al. On behalf of the American College of Cardiology Interventional Scientific Council. Revascularization for unprotected left main disease, evolution of the evidence basis to redefine treatment standards. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2009,54:1576-1588.
  • 7Palmerini T, Sangiorgi D, Marzocchi A, et al. Impact of acute coronary syndromes on two-year clinical outcomes in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents. AmJ Cardiol, 2010,105:174-178.
  • 8Park DW, Seung KB, Kim YH, et al. Long-term safety and efficacy of stenting versus coronary artery bypass grafting for unprotected left main coronary artery disease. 5-year results from the MAIN- COMPARE (Revascularization for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: comparison of percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus surgical revascularization) registry. J Am Coll Cardiol,2010, 56:117-124.
  • 9Palmerini T, Barlocco F, Santarelli A, et al. A comparison between coronary artery bypass grafting surgery and drug eluting stent for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery disease in elderly patients (aged375 years). Eur Heart J, 2007, 28:2714-2719.
  • 10Rodes-Cabau J, deBlois J, Bertrand OF, et al. Nonrandomized comparison of coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery disease in octagenarians. Circulation,2008, 118 : 2374- 2381.

共引文献1

同被引文献22

  • 1顾悟时.胸心外科手术学[M]. 2版.北京:人民卫生出版社,1996: 612-617.
  • 2Salazar E, Torres J, Barragan R, et al. Aortic valve replace-ment in patients 70 years and older[J]. Clin Cardiol, 2004,27(10): 565-570.
  • 3De Luea G, Gibson C M, Bellandi F, et al. Diabetes mellitus is associated with distal emho[ization, impaired myocardial perfusion, and higher mortality in patients with ST- segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary angioplasty and glycoprotein lib-Ilia inhibitors. Atherosclerosis, 2009, 207 ( 1 ) : 181-185.
  • 4Gudbjartsson D F, Bjornsdottir U S, Halapi E, et al. Sequence variants affecting eosinophil numbers associate with asthma and myocardial infarction. Nat Genet, 2009, 41 (3) : 342-327.
  • 5Home B D,Anderson J L, John J M, et al. Which white blood cell subtypes predict increased cardiovascular risk? J Am Call Cardiol, 2005, 45(10) : 1638-1643.
  • 6Akpek M, Kaya M G, Lam Y Y, et al. Relation of neutrophil/ lymphocyte ratio to coronary flow to in-hospital major adverse cardiac events in patients with ST-elevated myocardial infarction undergoing primary coronary intervention. Am J Cardiol, 2012, 110 (5) : 621-627.
  • 7Turk U, Tengiz I, Ozpelit E, et al. The relationship between platelet indices and clinical features of coronary artery disease. Kardiol Pol,2013, 71(11) : 1129-1134.
  • 8Miedema M D,Newcll M C, Duval S, et al. Causes of delay and associated mortality in patients transferred with ST- segment- elevation myocardial infarction. Circulation, 2011, 124 ( 15 ) : 1636-1644.
  • 9De Luea G, Ernst N, Suryapranata H, et al. Relation of interhospital delay and mortality in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction transferred for primary coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol, 2005, 95 ( 11 ) : 136l- 1363.
  • 10Manari A,Ortolani P, Guastaroba P, et al. Clinical impact of an inter- hospital transfer strategy in patients with ST- elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary angioplasty: the Emilia- Romagna ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction network. Eur Heart J, 2008, 29(15) : 1834-1842.

引证文献3

二级引证文献10

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部