期刊文献+

急性冠状动脉综合征风险评估方法学进展 被引量:4

Progress in Tools for Risk Assessment of Acute Coronary Syndromes
下载PDF
导出
摘要 急性冠状动脉综合征是一组心血管急危重症,包括不稳定型心绞痛、急性ST段抬高型/非ST段抬高型心肌梗死、心源性猝死,其早期识别并予以个体化风险评估对指导临床诊治策略、改善预后意义重大,而中国尚无自己的评估工具,至今仍借鉴其他国家的评分模型。现对国际上近年来针对急性冠状动脉综合征的较为公认的风险评估模型进行比较与综述,旨在为探索中国同类患者的风险评估模型提供参考和思路。 Acute coronary syndromes( ACS) are a group of emergency and severe cardiovascular diseases,including unstable angina,acute ST-segment / non ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and cardiac sudden death. Early detection and individual risk assessment are of great importance for guiding the therapeutic strategy and improving outcomes. However,currently we do not have our own risk assessment tool and only can use those of other countries instead. This review compared several important risk assessment tools for ACS widely used in clinical practice within recent years,aimed to provide references and ideas to investigate our own risk tool for Chinese patients with ACS.
出处 《心血管病学进展》 CAS 2015年第6期681-686,共6页 Advances in Cardiovascular Diseases
关键词 急性冠状动脉综合征 风险评估 危险评分 acute coronary syndromes risk assessment risk score
  • 相关文献

二级参考文献15

  • 1Barner HB. Operative treatment of coronary atherosclerosis. Ann Thorac Surg,2008,85 : 1473-1482.
  • 2Serruys PW, Kutryk MJB, Ong ATL. Coronary-artery stents. N Engl J Med, 2006,354:483-495.
  • 3Daemen J, Boersma E, Flather M, et al. Long-term safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting and coronary artery bypass surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease: a meta analysis with 5-year patient-level data from the ARTS, ERACI-Ⅱ, MASS-Ⅱ, and SoS trials. Circulation,2008, 118:1146-1154.
  • 4Booth J, Clayton T, Pepper J, et al. Randomized, controlled trial of coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with muhivessel coronary artery disease: six'year follow-up from the Stent or Surgery Trial (SoS). Circulation ,2008,118:381-388.
  • 5Harman EL, Wu C, Walford G, et al. Drug-eluting stents vs. coronary-artery bypass grafting in multivessel coronary disease. N Engl J Med ,2008,358:331-341.
  • 6Brener SJ, Galla JM, Bryant R 3rd, et al. Comparison of pereutaneous versus surgical revascularization of severe unprotected left main coronary stenosis in matched patients. Am J Cardiol, 2008,101 : 169-172.
  • 7Buszman PE, Kiesz SR, Bochenek A, et al. Acute and late outcomes of unprotected left main stenting in comparison with surgical revascularization. J Am Coll Cardiol,2008 ,51:538-545.
  • 8Chieffo A, Morici N, Maisano F, et al. Percutaneous treatment with drug-eluting stent implantation versus bypass surgery for unprotected left main stenosis: a single-center experience. Circulation ,2006,113:2542-2547.
  • 9Herz I, Moshkovitz Y, Loberman D, et al. Drug-eluting stents versus bilateral internal thoracic grafting for multivessel coronary disease. Ann Thorac Surg,2005 ,80 :2086-2090.
  • 10Lee MS, Kapoor N, Jamal F, et al. Comparison of coronary artery bypass surgery with percutaneous coronary intervention with drugeluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2006, 47:864-870.

共引文献141

同被引文献20

引证文献4

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