Percutaneous vs. surgical revascularization of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease: the SWEDEHEART registry.

IF 37.6 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Elmir Omerovic, Truls Råmunddal, Petur Petursson, Oskar Angerås, Araz Rawshani, Sandeep Jha, Kristofer Skoglund, Moman A Mohammad, Jonas Persson, Joakim Alfredsson, Robin Hofmann, Tomas Jernberg, Ole Fröbert, Anders Jeppsson, Emma C Hansson, Göran Dellgren, David Erlinge, Björn Redfors
{"title":"Percutaneous vs. surgical revascularization of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease: the SWEDEHEART registry.","authors":"Elmir Omerovic, Truls Råmunddal, Petur Petursson, Oskar Angerås, Araz Rawshani, Sandeep Jha, Kristofer Skoglund, Moman A Mohammad, Jonas Persson, Joakim Alfredsson, Robin Hofmann, Tomas Jernberg, Ole Fröbert, Anders Jeppsson, Emma C Hansson, Göran Dellgren, David Erlinge, Björn Redfors","doi":"10.1093/eurheartj/ehae700","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>The long-term outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and multivessel disease remain debated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Swedish Web-system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies registry was used to analyse 57 097 revascularized patients with NSTEMI with multivessel disease in Sweden from January 2005 to June 2022. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality, encompassing both in-hospital and long-term mortality; the secondary endpoints included myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, new revascularization, and heart failure. Multilevel logistic regression with follow-up time as a log-transformed offset variable and double-robust adjustment with the instrumental variable method were applied to control for known and unknown confounders.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Percutaneous coronary intervention was the primary therapy in 42 190 (73.9%) patients, while 14 907 (26.1%) received CABG. Percutaneous coronary intervention patients were generally older with more prior cardiovascular events, whereas CABG patients had higher incidences of diabetes, hypertension, left main and three-vessel disease, and reduced ejection fraction. Over a median follow-up of 7.1 years, PCI was associated with higher risks of death [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.67; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.54-1.81] and MI (aOR 1.51; 95% CI 1.41-1.62) but there was no significant difference in stroke. Repeat revascularization was three times more likely to PCI (aOR 3.01; 95% CI 2.57-3.51), while heart failure risk was 15% higher (aOR 1.15; 95% CI 1.07-1.25). Coronary artery bypass grafting provided longer survival within 15 years, especially in patients under 70 years of age, with left main disease or left ventricular dysfunction, though this benefit diminished over shorter time horizons.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Coronary artery bypass grafting is associated with lower risks of mortality, MI, repeat revascularization, and heart failure in patients with NSTEMI, particularly in high-risk subgroups. However, its survival benefit lessens with shorter life expectancy.</p>","PeriodicalId":11976,"journal":{"name":"European Heart Journal","volume":" ","pages":"518-531"},"PeriodicalIF":37.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Heart Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae700","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and aims: The long-term outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and multivessel disease remain debated.

Methods: The Swedish Web-system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies registry was used to analyse 57 097 revascularized patients with NSTEMI with multivessel disease in Sweden from January 2005 to June 2022. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality, encompassing both in-hospital and long-term mortality; the secondary endpoints included myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, new revascularization, and heart failure. Multilevel logistic regression with follow-up time as a log-transformed offset variable and double-robust adjustment with the instrumental variable method were applied to control for known and unknown confounders.

Results: Percutaneous coronary intervention was the primary therapy in 42 190 (73.9%) patients, while 14 907 (26.1%) received CABG. Percutaneous coronary intervention patients were generally older with more prior cardiovascular events, whereas CABG patients had higher incidences of diabetes, hypertension, left main and three-vessel disease, and reduced ejection fraction. Over a median follow-up of 7.1 years, PCI was associated with higher risks of death [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.67; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.54-1.81] and MI (aOR 1.51; 95% CI 1.41-1.62) but there was no significant difference in stroke. Repeat revascularization was three times more likely to PCI (aOR 3.01; 95% CI 2.57-3.51), while heart failure risk was 15% higher (aOR 1.15; 95% CI 1.07-1.25). Coronary artery bypass grafting provided longer survival within 15 years, especially in patients under 70 years of age, with left main disease or left ventricular dysfunction, though this benefit diminished over shorter time horizons.

Conclusions: Coronary artery bypass grafting is associated with lower risks of mortality, MI, repeat revascularization, and heart failure in patients with NSTEMI, particularly in high-risk subgroups. However, its survival benefit lessens with shorter life expectancy.

多支血管疾病非 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死的经皮与手术血管重建:SWEDEHEART 登记。
背景和目的:非ST段抬高型心肌梗死(NSTEMI)和多血管疾病患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)与冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的长期疗效仍存在争议:方法:瑞典心脏病循证治疗网络系统根据推荐疗法进行评估,对2005年1月至2022年6月期间瑞典57 097名NSTEMI合并多支血管疾病的血管再通患者进行了分析。主要终点是全因死亡率,包括院内死亡率和长期死亡率;次要终点包括心肌梗死(MI)、中风、新的血管重建和心力衰竭。为了控制已知和未知的混杂因素,采用了以随访时间为对数变换抵消变量的多层次逻辑回归和工具变量法的双重稳健调整:42 190 例(73.9%)患者接受了经皮冠状动脉介入治疗,14 907 例(26.1%)接受了 CABG。经皮冠状动脉介入治疗患者一般年龄较大,既往心血管事件较多,而 CABG 患者中糖尿病、高血压、左主干和三血管疾病以及射血分数降低的发病率较高。在中位随访 7.1 年期间,PCI 与较高的死亡风险[调整后比值比 (aOR) 1.67;95% 置信区间 (CI) 1.54-1.81]和心肌梗死风险(aOR 1.51;95% CI 1.41-1.62)相关,但在中风方面没有显著差异。再次血管重建的可能性是 PCI 的三倍(aOR 3.01;95% CI 2.57-3.51),而心力衰竭的风险则高出 15%(aOR 1.15;95% CI 1.07-1.25)。冠状动脉搭桥术可延长患者在15年内的存活时间,尤其是70岁以下、患有左主干疾病或左心室功能障碍的患者,但这种益处会随着时间的缩短而减少:冠状动脉旁路移植术可降低 NSTEMI 患者的死亡率、心肌梗死、重复血管重建和心力衰竭风险,尤其是在高风险亚组中。然而,随着预期寿命的缩短,冠状动脉旁路移植术对生存的益处也会减少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Heart Journal
European Heart Journal 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
39.30
自引率
6.90%
发文量
3942
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The European Heart Journal is a renowned international journal that focuses on cardiovascular medicine. It is published weekly and is the official journal of the European Society of Cardiology. This peer-reviewed journal is committed to publishing high-quality clinical and scientific material pertaining to all aspects of cardiovascular medicine. It covers a diverse range of topics including research findings, technical evaluations, and reviews. Moreover, the journal serves as a platform for the exchange of information and discussions on various aspects of cardiovascular medicine, including educational matters. In addition to original papers on cardiovascular medicine and surgery, the European Heart Journal also presents reviews, clinical perspectives, ESC Guidelines, and editorial articles that highlight recent advancements in cardiology. Additionally, the journal actively encourages readers to share their thoughts and opinions through correspondence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信