期刊文献+

不同完全血运重建策略对急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死多支病变患者预后影响 被引量:2

Impact of different strategies of complete percutaneous revascularization on prognosis of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的探讨不同完全血运重建策略对急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)多支病变患者预后的影响。方法选取自2009年1月至2014年6月空军军医大学附属西京医院收治的发病时间在12 h以内行完全血运重建的131例STEMI多支病变患者为研究对象。根据完全血运重建时机(非梗死相关血管重建时机)将研究对象进一步分为急诊经皮冠状动脉介入术(PCI)干预梗死相关血管后同台干预非梗死相关血管组(MV-PCI,n=21)、7 d内择期干预非梗死相关血管组(7 d stagedPCI,n=82)以及8~60 d择期干预非梗死相关血管组(60 d staged-PCI,n=28)。比较3组的主要研究终点,包括首次或二次PCI术后3年内主要不良心血管事件(MACE),定义为包括心源性死亡、再发心肌梗死、缺血驱动血运重建及心力衰竭的复合终点;次要研究终点,包括主要终点中各独立组份以及全因死亡、顽固性心绞痛及全部出血事件(BARC 1~5型)。结果所有患者均获得3年的随访,MV-PCI组、7 d staged-PCI组与60 d staged-PCI组MACE的发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但60 d staged-PCI组的MACE(7.1%比19.0%、20.7%)、缺血驱动血运重建(7.1%比19.0%、15.9%)及全部出血事件(BARC 1~5型)(0比4.8%、4.9%)的发生率在数值上显著低于MV-PCI组和7 d staged-PCI组,且60 d staged-PCI组MACE出现的时间明显晚于其他两组。结论对STEMI多支病变患者在急诊PCI开通梗死相关血管后8~60 d干预非梗死相关血管的完全血运重建策略有使MACE、缺血驱动血运重建及出血事件的发生风险下降的趋势。 Objective To investigate the impact of different strategies of complete percutaneous revascularization on prognosis in patients presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction( STEMI) and multivessel disease( MVD). Methods A retrospective study was performed on 131 cases of patients with STEMI and MVD who were admitted and underwent complete percutaneous revascularization( CPR) from January 2009 to June 2014. According to the timing of CPR( timing of non-infarction related vascular reconstruction),patients were divided into groups in which patients received non-culprit arteries revascularization during the same procedure as the primary PCI( MV-PCI group,n = 21),underwent revascularization of the non-culprit arteries at 1-7 days( 7 days staged-PCI group,n = 82) and 8-60 days( 60 days staged-PCI group,n = 28) after the primary PCI according to the timing of PCI for the non-culprit arteries. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death,recurrent myocardial infarction,ischemia-driven revascularization and heart failure within 3 years. Other endpoints included the components of the primary endpoints,all-cause death,refractory angina and all bleedings( BARC 1-5) at 3 years follow-up. Results All the patients were followed up for 3 years. The comparison of MV-PCI,7 days staged-PCI and 60 days staged-PCI groups had no statistically significant difference in the prespecified endpoints( P〉0. 05). The rates of MACE( 7. 1% versus 19. 0%,20. 7%),ischemia-driven revascularization( 7. 1% versus 19. 0%,15. 9%) and all bleedings( BARC1-5)( 0 versus 4. 8%,4. 9%) of 60 days staged-PCI group were significantly lower than those in the other two groups. The MACE of 60 days staged-PCI group occurred later than that in the other two groups. Conclusion The strategy of 60 days staged-PCI tends to reduce the rates of MACE,ischemia-driven revascularization or all bleedings( BARC 1-5) for patients with STEMI and MVD.
作者 许晓明 李超 裘淼涵 文亮 王贺阳 边丽雅 李毅 韩雅玲 程康 XU Xiao-ming;LI Chao;QIU Miao-han;WEN Liang;WANG He-yang;BIAN Li-ya;LI Yi;HAN Ya-ling;CHENG Kang(Department of Cardiology ,Xijing Hospital,Xi'an 710032 ,China)
出处 《临床军医杂志》 CAS 2018年第5期523-527,共5页 Clinical Journal of Medical Officers
基金 国家自然科学基金(81600356)
关键词 急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死 冠状动脉多支病变 经皮冠状动脉介入术 主要不良心血管事件 ST-segment elevation myocardial Infarction Muhivessel disease Percutaneous coronary intervention Major adverse cardiovascular events
  • 相关文献

参考文献3

二级参考文献23

  • 1Goldstein JA, Demetriou D, Grines CL, et al. Multiple complex coronary plaques in patients with acute myocardial infarction. NEngl J Med 2000; 343: 915-922.
  • 2Sorajja P, Gersh BJ, Cox DA, et al. Impact of multivessel disease on reperfusion success and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction. Fur Heart J 2007; 28: 1709-1716.
  • 3Kushner FG, Hand M, Smith SC Jr. et al. 2009 focused updates: ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (updating the 2004 guideline and 2007 focused update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI guidelines on percutaneous coronary intervention (updating the 2005 guideline and 2007 focused update). A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 54: 2205-2241.
  • 4Sorajja P, Gersh BJ, Cox DA, et al. Impact of multivessel disease on reperfusion success and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J 2007; 28: 1709-1716.
  • 5Muller DW, Topol EJ, Ellis SG, et al. Multivessel coronaiy artery disease: a key predictor of short-term prognosis after reperfusion therapy for acute myocardial infarction (TAMI) Study Group. AmHeartJ 1991; 121: 1042-1049.
  • 6Parodi G, Memisha G, Valenti R, et al. Five year outcome after primary coronary intervention for acute ST elevation myocardial infarction: results from a single centre experience. Heart 2005; 91: 1541-1544.
  • 7Corpus RA, House JA, Marso SP, et al. Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel disease and acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J 2004; 148: 493-500.
  • 8Antman EM, Hand M, Armstrong PW, et al. 2007 focused update of the ACC/AHA 2004 guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008; 51: 210-247.
  • 9Windecker S, Kolh P, Alfonso F, et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS 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) Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eurolntervention 2014; 46: 517-592.
  • 10Di Mario C, Mara S, Flavio A, et al. Single v.v. multivesseltreatment during primary angioplasty: results of the multicentre randomised HEpacoat for cuLPrit or multivessel stenting for Acute Myocardial Infarction (HELP AMI) Study. Int J Cardiovasc Intervent 2014; 6: 128-133.

共引文献16

同被引文献12

二级引证文献9

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