CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

A pragmatic approach to the use of inotropes for the management of acute and advanced heart failure: An expert panel consensus Randomized Trial of Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: 5-Year Outcomes of the PRECOMBAT Study Novel percutaneous interventional therapies in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: an integrative review The Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program Nationwide Perspectives and Recommendations: A JACC: Heart Failure Position Paper Angiotensin–neprilysin inhibition versus enalapril in heart failure A randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of cardiac contractility modulation in patients with systolic heart failure: rationale, design, and baseline patient characteristics. 中国心力衰竭诊断和治疗指南2018 Vaccination Trends in Patients With Heart Failure - Insights From Get With The Guidelines–Heart Failure Outcomes After Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting According to Lesion Site Results From the EXCEL Trial Effect of Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: Five-Year Follow-Up of the IVUS-XPL Randomized Trial

Original Research2013 Nov;9(7):809-16.

JOURNAL:EuroIntervention. Article Link

Two-year outcomes following unprotected left main stenting with first vs new-generation drug-eluting stents: the FINE registry. EuroIntervention.

Buchanan GL, Chieffo A, Colombo A et al. Keywords: rug-eluting stents; PCI; unprotected left main

ABSTRACT


AIMSTo assess two-year outcomes following first vs. new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in unprotected left main (ULMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention.


METHODS AND RESULTSAll eligible patients from our two-centre registry treated with first and new-generation DES from October 2006 to November 2010 were analysed. The study objective was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as all-cause mortality, target vessel revascularisation (TVR) and myocardial infarction (MI) at two years. In total, 186 patients were included: 93 (50.0%) treated with first vs. 93 (50.0%) with new-generation DES. No differences were observed in baseline clinical characteristics except for higher EuroSCORE with new-generation DES (3.6±2.5 vs. 4.6±2.7; p=0.007). No significant difference was observed in stenting techniques; two stents were used respectively in 53.8% vs. 44.1% (p=0.187). Notably, intravascular ultrasound guidance was more frequent with new-generation DES (46.2% vs. 61.3%; p=0.040). At 730.0 (interquartile range 365.5-1,224.5) days, there was a trend towards improved MACE with new-generation DES (31.2% vs. 19.6%; p=0.070) and a significant reduction in TVR (23.7% vs. 12.0%; p=0.038) and MI (4.3% vs. 0%; p=0.044). Notably, there were four cases of definite stent thrombosis (ST) with first vs. none with new-generation DES (p=0.044).

CONCLUSIONSIn our study, new-generation DES had a trend for less MACE and improved results with regard to MI, TVR and definite ST at two-year follow-up.