老年冠心病患者冠状动脉不同血运重建结果的临床疗效  

Effects of different revascularization strategies in elderly patients with coronary artery disease

作　　者：王豪[1] 马瑾[1] 吴波[1] 陈德[1] 张少衡[1] 姚建华[1] 张文佳[1] 郑鹏翔[1] 

机构地区：[1]上海同济大学附属杨浦医院心内科,200090

出　　处：《国际心血管病杂志》2014年第3期198-201,共4页International Journal of Cardiovascular Disease

基　　金：上海市卫生局科研项目(20114336)

摘　　要：目的:探讨接受经皮冠状动脉介入术(PCI)的老年冠心病患者完全血运重建(CR)和不完全血运重建(ICR)的临床疗效。方法:连续纳入2009年5月至2012年12月在我院行PCI术,且年龄≥75岁的冠心病患者共202例,根据冠状动脉造影结果分为CR组和ICR组。比较两组患者的临床基线资料、PCI参数、院内不良事件、主要终点事件和次要终点事件的发生率。结果:CR组患者123例,ICR组患者79例,平均随访时间(13.1±3.8)个月。ICR组患者术前左室射血分数较CR组低(P=0.004),两组间其余临床基线资料无统计学差异。两组院内不良事件发生率无统计学差异,随访结束后两组的主要终点事件和次要终点事件发生率无统计学差异。结论:对于75岁以上的老年冠心病患者,ICR并未增加不良事件发生率,但长期预后有待进一步观察。Objective：To compare the clinical outcomes between complete revascularization （CR） and incomplete revascularization （ICR） strategies in the elderly patients with coronary heart disease （CHD） who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI）.Methods：A total of 202 continuous CHD patients over 75 who underwent PCI from May 2009 to December 2012 were enrolled and assigned to CR or ICR group.The baseline clinical characteristics,PCI parameters and adverse events between the two groups were compared during the follow-up period.Results：There were 123 patients in CR group and 79 patients in ICR group,and all patients were followed up for an average of （13.1 ± 3.8）months.The preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction （LVEF） in ICR group was significantly lower than that in CR group （P =0.004）.There was no other difference in baseline characteristics between the two groups.No significant difference was observed in the in-hospital mortality between the two groups.Moreover,there was no significant difference in the primary and secondary endpoint outcomes between the two groups.Conclusion：For CHD patients over 75,ICR strategy does not increase the risk for adverse events but long-term prognosis remains to be studied.

关 键 词：老年人 经皮冠状动脉介入术 不完全血运重建 预后 

分 类 号：R541.4[医药卫生—心血管疾病]