期刊文献+

冠心病多支血管病不同治疗方法的疗效分析 被引量:8

The analysis of effect about different therapies on multivessel disease of coronary artery disease
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的 :观察不同治疗方法对冠心病多支血管病患者的临床疗效。方法 :对我院 1993年至1998年期间的 10 5 5例分别进行药物治疗、经皮冠状动脉腔内介入术 (PCI)或冠状动脉旁路手术 (CABG)治疗的冠心病患者进行随访研究。结果 :1.从远期疗效看 ,多支血管病变的终点事件发生率PCI组为9 10 % ,CABG组为 5 6 6 % ,药物治疗为 15 34% (P =0 0 3) ,3组间存在显著性差异 ;且多支血管病变的心绞痛复发率PCI组为 4 0 91% ,CABG为 2 9 2 5 % ,药物治疗为 4 8 5 7% ,(P =0 0 0 6 ) ,3组间存在显著性差异。其中CABG的心绞痛复发率显著低于PCI组 (P =0 0 4 1)。 2 .从近期疗效看 ,多支血管病的近期死亡与总终点事件的发生率CABG组最高 ,显著高于PCI和药物治疗组 (P <0 0 5 )。结论 :多支血管病的血运重建治疗与药物治疗比较 ,其远期的终点事件发生率低于药物治疗组 ,心绞痛复发率CABG组显著低于PCI与药物治疗组 ,近期终点事件发生率CABG组显著高于PCI组和药物治疗组。 Objective:observation on the effect about different therapy on multivessel disease of coronary artery disease; Method:1 055 registered patients(from 1993to 1998) suffered from coronary artery disease(CAD) were followed up.Result:1.In the group of multivessel disease, the longterm rate of Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACEs) was percutaneous coronary intervention(PCI) 9 10%,coronary artery by pass graft(CABG) 5 66%,pure drug therapy 15 34%,respectively, P =0 03. And the rate of angina recurrence were PTCA 40 91%,CABG 29 25%, pure drug therapy 48 57%, P =0 006.Conclusion:In the multiple vessels disease group, the rate of MACEs was lower in the group of PCI and CABG than in the group of medicine therapy; the rate of angina recurrence was the lowest in the group of CABG. [
出处 《心肺血管病杂志》 CAS 2003年第2期86-88,共3页 Journal of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Diseases
关键词 冠心病 多支血管病 疗效 药物治疗 经皮冠状动脉腔内介入术 冠状动脉旁路手术 Coronary arteriosclerosis\ Coronary angiopleasty, Transluminal balloon\ Multiple vessel disease\ Lteart surgical procedures
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

  • 1Pell JP, Walsh D, Norrie J, et al. Outcomes following coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in the stent era: a prospective study of all 9890 consecutive patients operated on in Scotland over a two year period. Heart, 2001,85(6) :662-666.
  • 2Espinola-Klein C, Rupprecht HJ, Erbel R, et al. Ten-year outcome after coronary angioplasty in patients with single-vessel coronary artery disease and comparison with the results of the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS). Am J Cardiol, 2000,85(3) :321-326.
  • 3Mathew V, Berger PB, Lennon RJ, et al. Comparison of percutaneous interventions for unstable angina pectoris in patients with and without previous coronary artery bypass grafting. Am J Cardiol, 2000, 86(9):931-937.
  • 4Goy JJ, Kaufmann U, Coy-Eggenberger D, et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing stenting to internal mammary artery grafting for proximal, isolated de novo left anterior coronary artery stenosis : the SIMA trial. Stenting vs Internal Mammary Artery. Mayo Clin Proc, 2000, 75(11):1113-1115.
  • 5Hemingway H, Crook AM, Feder G, et al. Underuse of coronary revascularization procedures in patients considered appropriate candidates for revascularization. N Engl J Med, 2001,344(9) :645-654.
  • 6Fitch K, Lazaro P, Aguilar MD, et al. European criteria for the appropriateness and necessity of coronary revascularization procedures. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg, 2000, 18(4):380-387.
  • 7Kravitz RL, Laouri M, Kahan JP, et al. Validity of criteria used for detecting underuse of coronary revascularization. JAMA, 1995, 274(8) :632-638.
  • 8Brorsson B, Bemstein SJ, Brook RH, et al. Quality of life of chronic stable angina patients 4 years after coronary angioplasty or coronary artery bypass surgery. J Intern Med, 2001, 249( 1 ) :47-57.
  • 95-year clinical and functional outcome comparing bypass surgery and angioplasty in patients with multivessel coronary disease. A multicenter randomized trial. JAMA, 277:715-721.
  • 10Serruys PW, Unger F, Sousa JE, et al. Comparision of coronary artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease. N Engl J Med, 2001,344: 1117-1124.

同被引文献94

  • 1纪承寅,魏永堂,齐艾江,王崇才.心脏介入性操作致心脏压塞的诊断与治疗[J].临床军医杂志,2006,34(1):94-97. 被引量:11
  • 2刘坤申,费兴久.心包穿刺术的常见并发症及处理经验[J].中国实用内科杂志,1997,17(2):68-70. 被引量:46
  • 3Escaned J. Secondary coronary revascularisation: an emerging issue. EuroIntervention. 2009, 5 ( Suppl D) : D6-D13.
  • 4Baz JA, Pinar E, Albarran A, et al. Spanish cardiac catheterization and coronary intervention registry. 17th official report of the Spanish society of cardiology working group on cardiac catheterization and interventional cardiology (1990-2007). Rev Esp Cardiol, 2008, 61: 1298-1314.
  • 5Hoffman SN, Tenbrook JA, Wolf MP, et al. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing coronary artery bypass graft with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: one- to eight-year outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2003, 41: 1293-1304.
  • 6Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery by- pass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med, 2009, 360: 961-972.
  • 7Lenzen MJ, Boersma E, Bertrand ME, et al. Management and outcome of patients with established coronary artery disease: the Euro Heart Survey on coronary revas- cularization. Eur Heart J, 2005, 26: 1169-1179.
  • 8Hannan EL, Racz M J, Walford G, et al. Long-term outcomes of coronary-artery bypass grafting versus stent implantation. N Engl J Med, 2005, 352: 2174-2183.
  • 9Curtis JP, Schreiner G, Wang Y, et al. All-cause readmission and repeat revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention in a cohort of medicare patients. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2009, 54: 903-907.
  • 10Sabik JR, Blackstone EH, Gillinov AM, et al. Occurrence and risk factors for reintervention after coronary artery bypass grafting. Circulation, 2006, 114( 1 Suppl) : I454-I460.

引证文献8

二级引证文献35

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