药物洗脱支架治疗冠状动脉小血管病变的疗效分析

目的通过分析比较裸金属支架(BMS)与药物洗脱支架[DES,包括雷帕霉素(Cypher)支架和紫杉醇(TAXUS)支架]治疗冠状动脉小血管病变疗效的差异,为DES治疗多支及单支小血管病变冠心病提供依据。方法连续入选2002年12月至2005年5月沈阳军区总医院首次接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)、靶血管为小血管病变且达到完全血运重建的486例患者,其中多支小血管病变(多支)150例。分为BMS组214例(多支63例)、Cypher组140例(多支46例)和TAXUS组132例(多支41例),对比分析各组患者住院期间及随访6个月的临床情况。结果3组患者冠脉病变特点、PCI成功率及住院期间主要不良心脏事件(MACE)发生率等指标差异均无显著性(P>0·05)。冠脉造影随访显示,两个DES组再狭窄率均明显低于BMS(Cypher组4·9%,TAXUS组7·5%对BMS组29·2%,P<0·05),随访期间MACE发生率亦明显低于BMS(Cypher组2·9%,TAXUS组3·9%对BMS组12·0%,P<0·01)。进一步分析多支小血管病例,发现两个DES组的再狭窄率及随访期间MACE发生率仍然明显低于BMS组(再狭窄率Cypher组6·7%,TAXUS组7·1%对BMS组37·5%,P<0·05;MACE发生率Cypher组4·1%,TAXUS组4·8%对BMS组21·0%,P<0·05)。结论Cypher和TAXUS支架治疗小血管病变安全可行,疗效显著,治疗多支小血管病变可得到相同的疗效。     

药物洗脱支架与切割球囊预扩张后置入金属裸支架治疗前降支开口病变的近、远期临床疗效比较

目的 探讨药物洗脱支架(DES)治疗前降支开口病变的近、远期临床疗效,并与早期应用切割球囊预扩张后(CBA)置入金属裸支架(BMS)的近、远期临床疗效进行比较.方法 自2003年11月至2005年5月采用DES对51例连续前降支开口病变的患者进行介入治疗,选自2000年5月至2003年11月应用CBA+BMS治疗前降支开口病变的连续50例患者作为对照组,要求所有患者在介入治疗后6～8个月进行冠状动脉造影复查,DES组与CBA+BMS组患者分别完成了2年和4年的临床随访.结果 在DES组中1例于住院期间发生急性心肌梗死,住院期间主要不良心脏事件(MACE)发生率为1.96%(1/51),29例完成了6～8个月的冠状动脉造影复查,再狭窄发生率为10.3%(3/29).在2年临床随访中1例死亡,靶病变重建4例,MACE发生率为9.8%(5/51).在CBA+BMS组中住院期间无心脏事件,28例完成了6～8个月的冠状动脉造影复查,再狭窄发生率为17.9%(5/28).2年临床随访中1例死亡,行靶病变重建5例,MACE发生率为12%(6/50).结论 在2年的临床随访中,支架内再狭窄、MACE发生率两组比较差异均无统计学意义,研究结果 提示无论是采用DES还是CBA+BMS治疗前降支开口病变均有良好的近、远期疗效.     

药物洗脱支架治疗冠状动脉小血管病变的疗效分析

目的 通过分析比较裸金属支架（BMS）与药物洗脱支架[DES，包括雷帕霉素（Cypher）支架和紫杉醇（TAXUS）支架]治疗冠状动脉小血管病变疗效的差异，为DES治疗多支及单支小血管病变冠心病提供依据。方法连续入选2002年12月至2005年5月沈阳军区总医院首次接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗（PCI）、靶血管为小血管病变且达到完全血运重建的486例患者，其中多支小血管病变（多支）150例。分为BMS组214例（多支63例）、Cypher组140例（多支46例）和TAXUS组132例（多支41例），对比分析各组患者住院期间及随访6个月的临床情况。结果3组患者冠脉病变特点、PCI成功率及住院期间主要不良心脏事件（MACE）发生率等指标差异均无显著性（P〉0．05）。冠脉造影随访显示，两个DES组再狭窄率均明显低于BMS（Cypher组4．9％，TAXUS组7．5％对BMS组29．2％，P〈0．05），随访期间MACE发生率亦明显低于BMS（Cypher组2．9％，TAXUS组3．9％对BMS组12、0％，P〈0．01）。进一步分析多支小血管病例，发现两个DES组的再狭窄率及随访期间MACE发生率仍然明显低于BMS组（再狭窄率Cypher组6．7％，TAXUS组7．1％对BMS组37．5％，P〈0．05；MACE发生率Cypher组4、1％。TAXUS组4．8％对BMS组21．O％，P〈0．05）。结论Cypher和TAXUS支架治疗小血管病变安全可行，疗效显著，治疗多支小血管病变可得到相同的疗效。     

多支冠状动脉病变患者1911例PCI二年疗效

目的评价多支冠状动脉病变（MVD）通过经皮冠状动脉介入（PCI）进行血运重建的长期疗效。方法1995年6月2003年12月连续2028例在我院成功接受PCI的MVD患者,对其心绞痛复发率、造影复查再狭窄率和主要不良心脏事件（MACE）的发生率进行回顾分析。结果2028例MVD患者,完全性血运重建率86.2%（1748/2028）,住院期间共死亡26例（总病死率1.3%）,对存活出院的2002例患者中的1911例随访24个月,随访率95.5%,其心绞痛复发率、造影复查再狭窄率和MACE发生率分别为10.7%、14.6%、25.4%,其中1754例植入普通金属支架（BMS）,157例植入药物洗脱支架（DES）。尽管DES组患者冠心病危险因素多、病变程度复杂,不稳定心绞痛占61.8%、糖尿病占41.4%、慢性完全闭塞病变（CTO）占37.6%、3支病变占58.0%,但心绞痛复发率、造影复查再狭窄率和MACE发生率均显著低于BMS组（分别为4.5%vs11.2%,3.2%vs15.7%,8.9%vs26.9%,均P<0.01）。结论PCI进行血运重建是治疗MVD的有效方法,但仍存在BMS支架术后不良事件发生率高,DES用于治疗MVD具有更好的长期疗效。     

急诊PCI植入药物支架与金属裸支架治疗急性心肌梗死的对比研究

目的 比较急诊经皮冠状动脉介入治疗植入药物支架(drug eluting stent,DES)和金属裸支架(baremetal stent.BMS)对急性心肌梗死(acute myocardial infarction,AMI)的疗效及安全性.方法 对136例发病在12 h内或发病超过12 h但仍有胸痛的AMI患者进行急诊经皮冠状动脉介入治疗,植入BMS或DES.观察手术成功率、住院及随访期间主要心血管事件.结果 136例患者中植入BMS 72例,植入DES 64例,DES组所植入支架的直径明显小于BMS组,而长度则大于BMS组.两组手术成功率、住院期间主要心血管事件发生率、支架内亚急性血栓形成率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).随访期间BMS组总主要心血管事件发生率、支架内再狭窄及靶病变冉血管化明显多于DES组,而心绞痛复发、再发心肌梗死、心功能恶化及心脏性死亡等方面比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论 急诊经皮冠状动脉介入治疗植入BMS和DES均具有较好的成功率和安全性,与BMS相比,DES可降低远期靶血管再狭窄和再次血运重建的发生率.     

药物洗脱支架与金属裸支架在急性ST段抬高心肌梗死急诊介入治疗中应用长期随访结果的比较

目的 探讨与金属裸支架(BMS)相比,Cypher支架(Cordis公司,美国)在急性ST段抬高心肌梗死(STEMI)急诊经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)中应用的安全性和长期有效性.方法 连续选择2002年12月至2005年3月间STEMI患者407例,均于发病12 h内行急诊PCI治疗,于梗死相关血管靶病变置入Cypher支架或BMS.对所有病例随访1.5～4.0年(平均28.7±11.7个月),比较两类支架院内及出院后严重心脏不良事件(MACE,包括死亡、再发心肌梗死、靶病变重建等)发生的差异.结果 407例患者中置入Cypher支架者131例,置入BMS者276例.Cypher支架组所置入支架的直径明显小于BMS组(3.0 mm与3.2 mm,P=0.00).两组在随访期间心因性死亡(1.5%与6.9%,P=0.02)以及随访期间总的主要不良心脏事件(MACE)(6.1%与12.7%,P=0.04)差异均有统计学意义.应用Cox回归比例风险模型计算Cypher支架组在随访期间发生总MACE的相对危险度为0.45(P＜0.05).两组的支架内血栓形成发生率差异无统计学意义,支架内再狭窄发生率以及靶病变重建率差异亦无统计学意义,但Cypher支架较之BMS有明显降低的趋势.结论 在STEMI的急诊PCI治疗时,置入Cypher支架具有较好的安全性和长期有效性,与BMS相比可以降低远期复合MACE以及心因性死亡的发生率. 2)以及随访期间总的主要不良心脏事件(MACE)(6.1%与12.7%,P=0.04)差异均有统计学意义.应用Cox回归比例风险模型计算Cypher支架组在随访期间发生总MACE的相对危险度为0.45(P＜0.05).两组的支架内血栓形成发生率差异无统计学意义,支架内再狭窄发生率以及靶病变重建率 异亦无统计学意义,但Cypher支架较之BMS有明显降低的趋势.结论 在STEMI的急诊PCI治疗时,置人Cypher支架具有较好的安全性和长期有效性,与BMS相比可以降低远期复合MACE以及心因性死亡的发生率. 2)以及随访期间总的主要不良心脏事件(MACE)(6.1%与12.7%,P=0.04)差异均有统计学意义.应用Cox回归比例风险模型计算Cypher支架组在随访期间发生总MACE的相对危险度为0.45(P＜0.     

糖尿病多支冠状动脉病变患者不同血管重建疗效的比较

目的:评价对糖尿病多支冠状动脉病变患者的裸支架(BMS)置入、药物洗脱支架(DES)置入和冠状动脉搭桥手术(CABG)3种不同血管重建的疗效。方法:选择接受血管重建治疗的糖尿病伴多支冠状动脉病变患者427例,比较其BMS、DES和CABG不同治疗方法的疗效和随访2年的临床结果。结果:BMS、DES和CABG3组间住院时期的不良心脑血管事件(MACCE)发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义。2年随访结果中,BMS组、DES组再次血管重建率分别为17.6%、10.4%,均显著高于CABG组的1.9%(P<0.01);BMS组的总MACCE发生率为23.1%,显著高于CABG组的10.7%(P<0.01),而DES的总MACCE发生率与CABG组相比差异无统计学意义。结论:糖尿病多支血管病变患者置入BMS后再次血管重建率和总MACCE发生率显著高于CABG,而DES的中期临床疗效并不逊于CABG。     

药物洗脱支架对完全闭塞性病变介入治疗预后影响的评估

目的比较对于完全性闭塞病变采用药物洗脱支架和金属裸支架的近期和远期预后。方法选择我院近期连续接受置入药物洗脱支架(DES)或金属裸支架(BMS)治疗,并且进行冠状动脉造影随访的155例存在完全闭塞病变的冠心病患者。患者在支架术后6个月左右接受冠状动脉造影随访。结果共155例患者(138名男性,17名女性)159处靶病变置入232枚支架完成造影随访,其中慢性完全性闭塞65例,占41.9%。其中C型病变占总数的85.4%。在患者基本条件方面,DES组2型糖尿病比例要多于BMS组(33.8%比18.5%,P=0.030)。在病变基本条件方面,DES组和BMS组C型病变分别占89.6%和72.0%(P=0.005),DES组病变更为复杂。DES组慢性完全闭塞病变比例明显高于BMS组(60.3%比24.4%,P<0.001)。DES组和BMS组的支架长度和病变长度没有差别。DES组参考血管直径小于BMS组[(2.72±0.36)mm比(2.96±0.52)mm,P=0.001]。6个月随访结果显示支架再狭窄DES组明显低于BMS组(15.6%比41.5%,P<0.001)。DES组支架再狭窄更多为局限性(58.3%比17.6%,P<0.001)。DES组的靶病变血管重建率明显低于BMS组(5.8%比19.9%,P=0.001)。病变内晚期腔径丢失DES明显小于BMS[(0.36±0.63)mm比(1.04±0.70)mm,P<0.001]。晚期支架内血栓DES有2例,BMS为0。DES组有1例死亡。术后主要心脏不良事件发生率两组分别是1.4%和11.1%,DES组显著低于BMS组(P=0.032)。结论我们的研究发现对于完全闭塞性病变的治疗,DES有着良好的治疗效果,比BMS有着明显减低的再狭窄率、靶病变血管重建率,并且在随访期间患者有着更少的心血管事件。     

药物洗脱支架置入术的长期随访

目的:了解药物洗脱支架(DES)置入术的长期疗效.方法:收集255例DES置入及258例金属裸支架(BMS)置入患者的临床资料并进行长期临床随访,记录2组患者在随访时主要心血管不良事件(MACE)的发生情况.结果:与BMS组比较,DES组心绞痛再发率(6.27%:17.05%,P＜0.05)、MACE发生率(3.92%:10.47%,P＜0.05)及因心脏病住院率(5.29%:15.19%,P＜0.01)明显减少,而在晚期支架血栓形成、全因性死亡、非致死性心肌梗死及恶性肿瘤方面,2组相比差异无统计学意义.经校正了不匹配因素后发现应用BMS与心绞痛再发(r＝0.084 9,P＝0.048)、心因性死亡(r＝0.098 2,P＝0.027)、MACE(r＝0.093 7,P＝0.035)及因心脏病住院(r＝0.090 8,P＝0.041)的发生呈正相关.结论:与BMS相比,DES可减少心绞痛再发及MACE,而不增加晚期支架血栓形成及全因性死亡.     

左主干病变不同血运重建治疗方法对比评价

目的 评价真实临床环境下不同血运重建方法对冠心病左主干病变患者的近期及远期疗效.方法 将我院1995年至2005年10年期间接受血运重建治疗的左主干病变冠心病患者分为金属裸支架(BMS)治疗组、西罗莫司洗脱支架(SES)治疗组以及冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)组,记录患者围手术期、术后6个月、术后1年不良心脑血管事件(MACCEs)发生率;接受支架治疗的患者术后6～9个月均要求复查冠状动脉造影;所有患者每月心内科门诊就诊,记录患者心绞痛复发等情况.结果 (1)自1995年至2005年期间我院共收治左主干病变冠心病患者415例,其中1995年10月至1999年8月共有97例接受了BMS治疗,1999年9月至2005年5月共有122例接受了SES治疗,1995年至2005年共有196例接受CABG治疗;(2)CABG组糖尿病患者比例高于BMS组及SES组,而在PCI组(包括MS组和SES组)合并肾功能不全、脑血管疾患及肺功能障碍患者比例高于CABG组;(3)BMS组、SES组及CABG组手术、住院期间及术后30 d内的MACCEs事件发生率分别为3.09%、4.01%及10.71%,P＜0.01;BMS组及SES组住院时间显著短于CABG组(分别为5 d、5 d及8.5 d);(4)SES组造影再狭窄率显著低于BMS组(9.9%比23.6%,P＜0.01);(5)平均随访1年SES组与CABG组无MACCEs事件生存率显著高于BMS组(分别为85%、84%、64%,P＜0.01).结论 真实临床环境下左主干病变血运重建治疗即刻手术成功率高,PCI组围手术期不良心脑血管事件发生率低于CABG组,SES组与CABG组1年无事件生存率类似,均显著高于BMS组.     

Cardiac events after non-cardiac surgery in patients with previous coronary intervention in the drug-eluting stent era

The peri-operative risk for patients with coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) who subsequently have non-cardiac surgery (NCS) is unclear. We performed this retrospective study of all patients in our institution who had coronary intervention and subsequent NCS from 2003 through December 2008 to evaluate the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients who received DES compared to those who received bare-metal stents (BMS) or had percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) during the same time period. The main outcome measures were 30-day post-operative myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularization (TVR) and cardiac death. During the 6-year study period, 1,770 coronary interventions were performed and 238 patients subsequently had NCS in 8 days to 49 months. Eighteen patients had PTCA, 79 BMS and 141 DES. Acute myocardial infarction occurred in 1 patient who had PTCA, 2 who had BMS and 14 who had DES (p = 0.10). Stent thrombosis occurred in 6 patients who had DES and none who had BMS (p = 0.09). Seven patients who had DES had TVR compared to 1 patient who had BMS and none who had PTCA (p = 0.41). Cardiac mortality occurred in 2 patients who had DES and none who had PTCA or BMS (p = 0.35). In conclusion, the 30-day MACE in patients who received coronary DES and undergone NCS were not significantly different compared to those who received BMS or had PTCA only, with a trend toward higher stent thrombosis in the DES group.     

Immediate procedural and long-term clinical outcomes following drug-eluting stent implantation to ostial saphenous vein graft lesions

BACKGROUND: Ostial saphenous vein graft (OSVG) lesions were excluded from all the clinical trials demonstrating significantly lower restenosis rates with drug-eluting stents (DES) compared to bare metal stents (BMS). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of DES in OSVG lesions by assessing angiographic and 12-month clinical outcomes. METHODS: 70 consecutive patients (70 OSVG lesions) underwent coronary stent implantation between May 2003 and April 2006: 37 lesions received DES and 33 lesions BMS. Endpoints were all cause and cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), examined separately and as a combined end-point (major adverse cardiac events, MACE). RESULTS: Procedural (94.6% for DES and 87.9% for BMS) and angiographic (100% for DES and 100% for BMS) success did not differ between the two groups. The only in-hospital events were non-Q wave MI (DES 8.1% versus BMS 12.1%, P=0.69). At 30-day follow-up, there were no other events. Overall, at 1-year follow-up, the BMS group had a higher TLR (30.3% versus 5.4%, P=0.015), TVR (33.3% versus 10.8%, P=0.045) and MACE rate (36.4% versus 10.8%, P=0.024) compared to the DES group. CONCLUSIONS: Drug-eluting stent implantation to OSVG lesions achieves better clinical results than BMS but is still associated with a relatively high incidence (10.8%) of revascularization at 1-year follow-up.     

Treatment of saphenous vein graft lesions with drug-eluting stents: immediate and midterm outcome

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present report was to evaluate clinical and angiographic outcomes of drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in saphenous vein graft (SVG) lesions. BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of DES implantation for the treatment SVG lesions remains uncertain. METHODS: We evaluated in-hospital and six-month outcomes in 61 consecutive patients treated with DES in SVG lesions from March 2002 to March 2004 (DES group), as compared to 89 consecutive patients treated with bare-metal stents (BMS) in the 24 months immediately before the introduction of DES (BMS group). Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) were recorded in-hospital and at six-month follow-up. RESULTS: The rate of in-hospital MACE was similar between the two groups (6.6% vs. 5.6%, p = 1.0). Cumulative MACE at six months was 11.5% in the DES group and 28.1% in the BMS group (p = 0.02). The DES group had a significantly lower incidence of in-segment restenosis (10.0% vs. 26.7%, p = 0.03), TLR (3.3% vs. 19.8%, p = 0.003), and TVR (4.9% vs. 23.1%, p = 0.003). By Cox regression analysis, diabetes (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.03; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.33 to 6.90; p = 0.008), usage of BMS (HR: 2.53; 95% CI: 1.07 to 5.97; p = 0.03), and age of SVG (HR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.19; p = 0.02) were identified as predictors of MACE at six-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to BMS implantation, DES implantation in SVG lesions appears safe with favorable and improved mid-term outcomes.     

药物支架和裸支架治疗急性ST段抬高心肌梗死患者的随访研究

目的 评价药物支架和裸支架治疗急性ST段抬高心肌梗死患者疗效和预后方法217例接受了急诊经皮冠状动脉介入治疗急性ST段抬高心肌梗死患者纳入本研究,药物支架组92例、裸支架组125例,收集基线资料并随访6～38个月.结果 裸支架组的平均年龄(64.6±11.9)岁、Killip分级(2、3、4级)为25.9%和支架平均直径为(3.07±0.38)mm,均高于药物支架组(61.2±11.8)岁、12.2%和(2.91±0.40),差异有统计学意义(t=2.09,P=0.037;χ2=5.53,P=0.019;t=2.78,P=0.006),裸支架组平均左心室射血分数(55.4±11.9)%低于药物支架组(60.3±12.8)%,差异有统计学意义(t=-2.57,P=0.011).支架长度[(32.8±16.2)mm、(26.2±11.2)mm]、支架后扩张(45.7%、21.6%)、糖尿病(28.2%、16.0%)药物支架组高于裸支架组(t=-3.54,P=0.001;χ2=13.85,P=0.0002;χ2=4.77,P=0.030).随访期间,主要不良心脏事件(MACE)发生36例,药物支架组6例(6.5%),裸支架组30例(24.0%)(χ2=11.70,P＜0.01).结论 急性ST段抬高心肌梗死急诊介入治疗是安全有效的,同裸支架相比药物支架明显降低随访期MACE发生率而改善预后.     

药物洗脱支架在老年急性心肌梗死患者治疗中疗效观察

目的评价药物洗脱支架治疗老年ST段抬高型急性心肌梗死（AMI）患者的安全性和有效性。方法连续性收集2005年1月-12月行直接介入治疗的105例60岁及以上的老年ST段抬高型AMI患者，其中，49例接受药物洗脱支架植入，56例接受金属裸支架植入，对两组患者术后30d和240d的主要心血管不良事件（包括死亡、非致死性再梗死和靶血管血运重建）进行随访、分析。结果药物洗脱支架组和金属裸支架组的手术成功率差异无统计学意义（96％与95％，P〉0．05）。术后30d内，药物洗脱支架组和金属裸支架组的心脏不良事件发生率差异无统计学意义（8、2％与12．5％，P〉0.05），两组由冠状动脉造影证实的早期支架内血栓发生率差异无统计学意义（2．0％与1．8％，P〉0.05）。术后240d随访，与金属裸支架植入比较，药物洗脱支架植入能明显减少心脏不良事件发生率[12．2％与30、0％，相对危险比为0、38，95％可信限（CI）：0、12～0、96，P〈0.053，靶血管血运重建率显著降低[2.0％与25．0％，相对危险比为0．08（95％CI：0．01～0.63），P〈0．01]。术后30～240d，两组未发生晚期支架内血栓。结论与金属裸支架比较，药物洗脱支架应用于老年ST段抬高型AMI患者可能并不增加支架内血栓的中期发生率，同时可以降低患者8个月靶血管再次血运重建率。     

Drug-eluting stent-supported percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic total coronary occlusion.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the clinical and angiographic outcomes after drug-eluting stent (DES)-supported percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic total coronary occlusion (CTO). BACKGROUND: There are few data about the efficacy of DES-supported PCI for CTO. METHODS: All consecutive patients who had a sirolimus-eluting stent or a paclitaxel-eluting stent implanted for CTO from December 2003 to December 2004 were analyzed. Clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients treated with DES were compared with a case-matched control group of patients treated with bare metal stents (BMS) in the 12 months before the routine use of DES. RESULTS: Successful DES-supported PCI was performed in 92 patients and 104 CTO. The case-matched control group consisted of 26 patients and 27 CTO successfully treated with BMS. There were no differences between groups in baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics. Stent length in the DES group was higher as compared with that of BMS group (51+/-28 mm vs. 40+/-19 mm, P=0.073). The 6-month major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate was lower in the DES group as compared with that of BMS group (9.8% vs. 23%, P=0.072). The angiographic follow-rate was 80% in the DES group and 81% in the BMS group. The 6-month restenosis rate was 19% in the DES group and 45% in the BMS group (P<0.001). By multivariate analysis, it was found that in the DES group, the only predictors of restenosis were stented segment length (OR 1.031, 95% CI 1.01-1.06, P=0.009) and a target vessel reference diameter<2.5 mm (OR 6.48, 95% CI 1.51-27.83, P=0.012), while the only predictor of MACE was stent length (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.08, P=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: DES implantation for CTO decreases the risk of mid-term restenosis and MACE. Small vessels and diffuse disease requiring the implantation of multiple stents and very long stents for full coverage of the target lesion are still associated with a relatively high risk of restenosis.     

Management of multivessel coronary disease after ST elevation myocardial infarction treated by primary angioplasty

BACKGROUND: Optimal treatment strategy of patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing primary angioplasty is still unclear. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of non-culprit vessels simultaneously or soon after primary angioplasty is feasible and safe, but available data failed to consistently show a benefit in long-term clinical outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively compared in-hospital and long-term outcomes for patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD treated by primary angioplasty with (Group 1, n=64) or without (Group 2, n=46) early, staged PCI of other angiographically significant coronary lesions. In-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were defined as a composite of death, periprocedural myocardial infarction after staged, elective PCI, stroke, stent thrombosis, major bleeding, and vascular complications. MACE at follow-up were defined as a composite of death, stroke, stent thrombosis, any coronary revascularization, and re-hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome. RESULTS: Group 1 patients underwent staged PCI 5.9 +/- 3.5 days after primary angioplasty. The mean length of follow-up was 13 months (392 +/- 236 days). The incidence of in-hospital MACE was 20.3% in Group 1 and 10.8% in Group 2 (P=0.186); the incidence of out of hospital MACE was 9.3% in Group 1 and 23.9% in Group 2 (P=0.037). In Group 1 in-hospital MACE were driven by periprocedural myocardial infarction after the elective procedure, which occurred in 15.6% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that multivessel, staged PCI in STEMI patients is associated with a low incidence of adverse events at follow-up but with a higher incidence of in-hospital MACE, mainly driven by periprocedural myocardial infarction during the elective procedure.     

老年急性ST段抬高心肌梗死患者应用国产雷帕霉素药物洗脱支架5年临床随访

目的评估老年急性ST段抬高心肌梗死(STEMI)患者应用国产支架的长期安全性。方法入选年龄≥60岁的急性STEMI患者113例,随机分为国产雷帕霉素药物洗脱支架(DES)组56例和金属裸支架(BMS)组57例。随访5年,观察支架内血栓形成和主要心脏不良事件(MACE)发生率情况。结果 5年随访期间,DES组与BMS组病死率分别为7.1%和7.0%(P>0.05);DES组靶病变重建、MACE分别为10.7%、23.2%,BMS组分别为28.1%、42.1%(P<0.05)。DES组支架内血栓、极晚期支架内血栓发生率分别为8.9%、3.6%;BMS组分别为7.0%、1.8%,2组比较差异无统计学意义。结论老年急性STEMI患者应用国产雷帕霉素DES较BMS明显降低MACE,且极晚期血栓发生率无明显升高。