检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:陈绍良[1] 张俊杰[1] 叶飞[1] 陈韵岱[2] 吕树铮[2] Tan Huaycheem Tejas Patel Kawajiri Kenji Israel Tamari 单守杰[1] 朱中生[1] 林松[1] 田乃亮[1] 李晓波[1] 刘志忠[1] Michael Lee 魏盟[8] 徐亚伟[9] 袁争白[1] 钱均[1] 孙学文[1] 杨松[1] 陈金国[1] 何奔[10] Sumitsuji
机构地区:[1]南京医科大学附属南京第一医院心内科,210006 [2]首都医科大学附属北京安贞医院 [3]新加坡国立大学医院 [4]印度Kraishina心脏中心 [5]日本德州会医学中心 [6]以色列Wolfson医学中心 [7]中国香港皇家玛丽医院 [8]上海交通大学附属第六人民医院 [9]上海同济大学附属第十人民医院 [10]上海交通大学附属仁济医院 [11]日本大阪国立循环器中心
出 处:《中华心血管病杂志》2008年第2期100-107,共8页Chinese Journal of Cardiology
摘 要:目的比较双对吻挤压(DK crush)和经典挤压技术治疗冠状动脉分叉病变的临床效果。方法311例真性分叉病变患者随机分入DK crush组(n=155)和经典挤压组(n=156),随访时间8个月。一级及二级终点分别为主要心脏不良事件(MACE,包括心肌梗死、心原性死亡和靶病变血运重建)和血管直径再狭窄及晚期丢失。结果DK crush组糖尿病患者较多。经典挤压组及DK crush组最终对吻扩张(FKBI)成功率分别为76%和100%(P〈0.001)。DK crush术式的不足包括造影剂用量大(P=0.04)、球囊数量多(P〈0.01)、手术时间长(P〈0.001),但是对吻扩张不满意率显著减少(27.6%比6.3%,P〈0.01)。临床随访率为100%,冠状动脉造影随访率为82%。经典挤压组累计再狭窄率为32.3%,而DK crush组为20.3%(P=0.01),经典挤压组分支血管再狭窄率高(24.4%比12.3%,P=0.01),而两组间主干血管再狭窄率差异无统计学意义。经典挤压组术后8个月时的累计MACE发生率为24.4%(FKBI失败组为35.9%,FKBI成功组为19.7%),显著高于DK crush组(11.4%,P=0.02)。经典挤压组血栓栓塞率为3.2%(FKBI失败组为5.1%,FKBI成功组为1.7%),而DK crush组为1.3%(P〉0.05)。经典挤压组术后8个月时无靶病变血运重建生存率为75.4%(FKBI失败组为71.2%,FKBI成功组为77.6%),而DK crush组为89.5%(P=0.002)。结论DKcrush可能是治疗冠状动脉分又病变的较佳术式。Objective To determine independent factors correlated with clinical effects of DK crush and classical crush technique with drug-eluting stents on bifurcation lesions. Methods 311 patients with bifurcation lesions were randomized to classical (C, n = 156) or double kissing (DK) crush (n = 155) stent implantation group. The primary endpoints included major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Results Final kissing balloon inflation (FKBI) success rate was 76% in C and 100% in DK groups ( P 〈0. 001 ). DK crush procedure was characterized by lower unsatisfactory FKBI rate ( 27. 6% vs. 6. 3%, P 〈 0. 01 ) . Clinical follow-up was available in 100% and angiographic follow-up in 82% patients. The overall restenosis rate was 32. 3% in C and 20. 3% in DK groups (P =0. 01 ) ,respectively. Cumulative 8-month MACE was 35.9% in without-FKBI and 19. 7% in with-FKBI sub-groups, and 11.4% in DK group (P=0.02). The incidence of stent thrombosis was 3. 2% in C group (5.1% without vs. 1.7% with FKBI) and 1.3% in DK group ( P 〉 0.05 ). The predictive factors of MACE included minimal side branch stent lumen diameter and lack of DK crush technique. Conclusion DK crush technique is an alternative of double stenting techniques in terms of improvement of restenosis and clinical outcomes.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.15