CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Medical Therapy for CTEPH: Is There Still Space for More? Utilization and Outcomes of Measuring Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease Diagnostic Performance of Angiogram-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve: A Pooled Analysis of 5 Prospective Cohort Studies Local Low Shear Stress and Endothelial Dysfunction in Patients With Nonobstructive Coronary Atherosclerosis Circulating Plasma microRNAs In Systemic Sclerosis-Associated Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension The Impact of Coronary Physiology on Contemporary Clinical Decision Making Impact of low tissue backscattering by optical coherence tomography on endothelial function after drug-eluting stent implantation Randomized trial of simple versus complex drug-eluting stenting for bifurcation lesions: the British Bifurcation Coronary Study: old, new, and evolving strategies Genetic analyses in a cohort of 191 pulmonary arterial hypertension patients Coronary Physiology in the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory

Clinical Trial2008 Dec;1(3):185-92.

JOURNAL:Circ Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Impact of bifurcation technique on 2-year clinical outcomes in 773 patients with distal unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents

Palmerini T, Marzocchi A, Tamburino C et al.

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Distal unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis represents a technical challenge for interventional cardiologists. In this study, we compared 2-year clinical outcomes of different stenting strategies in patients with distal ULMCA stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents.


METHODS AND RESULTS - The survey promoted by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology on ULMCA stenosis was an observational study on patients with ULMCA stenosis treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. In this study, we selected patients with distal ULMCA stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents. Seven hundred seventy-three patients were eligible for this study: 456 were treated with 1 stent (group 1) and 317 with 2 stents (group 2). The primary end point of the study was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as the occurrence of mortality, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. During a 2-year follow-up, risk-adjusted survival free from MACE was significantly higher in patients in group 1 than in patients in group 2. The propensity-adjusted hazard ratio for the risk of 2-year MACE in patients in group 1 versus group 2 was 0.53 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.76). The propensity-adjusted hazard ratio for the risk of 2-year cardiac mortality and myocardial infarction in patients in group 1 versus group 2 was 0.38 (95% CI, 0.17 to 0.85).

CONCLUSIONS - Compared with the 2-stent technique, the 1-stent technique is associated with a better 2-year MACE-free survival. The stenting strategy is a prognostic factor that should be taken into account when deciding the optimal revascularization treatment.