CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Impact of Off-Hours Versus On-Hours Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Myocardial Damage and Clinical Outcomes in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction The (R)Evolution of the CICU - Better for the Patient, Better for Education Canadian SCAD Cohort Study: Shedding Light on SCAD From a United Front Decreased inspired oxygen stimulates de novo formation of coronary collaterals in adult heart Selection of stenting approach for coronary bifurcation lesions BMI, Infarct Size, and Clinical Outcomes Following Primary PCI Patient-Level Analysis From 6 Randomized Trials Update in the Percutaneous Management of Coronary Chronic Total Occlusions Association of the PHACTR1/EDN1 Genetic Locus With Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection Eruptive Calcified Nodules as a Potential Mechanism of Acute Coronary Thrombosis and Sudden Death Clinical Practice Guideline for Screening and Management of High Blood Pressure in Children and Adolescents

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.