Preventive percutaneous coronary intervention for non-flow-limiting vulnerable atherosclerotic coronary plaques in diabetes: the PREVENT trial.

IF 37.6 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Min Chul Kim, Seung-Jung Park, Duk-Woo Park, Jung-Min Ahn, Do-Yoon Kang, Won-Jang Kim, Chang-Wook Nam, Jin-Ok Jeong, In-Ho Chae, Hiroki Shiomi, Hsien-Li Kao, Joo-Yong Hahn, Sung-Ho Her, Bong-Ki Lee, Tae Hoon Ahn, Kiyuk Chang, Jei Keon Chae, David Smyth, Gary S Mintz, Gregg W Stone, Youngkeun Ahn
{"title":"Preventive percutaneous coronary intervention for non-flow-limiting vulnerable atherosclerotic coronary plaques in diabetes: the PREVENT trial.","authors":"Min Chul Kim, Seung-Jung Park, Duk-Woo Park, Jung-Min Ahn, Do-Yoon Kang, Won-Jang Kim, Chang-Wook Nam, Jin-Ok Jeong, In-Ho Chae, Hiroki Shiomi, Hsien-Li Kao, Joo-Yong Hahn, Sung-Ho Her, Bong-Ki Lee, Tae Hoon Ahn, Kiyuk Chang, Jei Keon Chae, David Smyth, Gary S Mintz, Gregg W Stone, Youngkeun Ahn","doi":"10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf273","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aims: </strong>The efficacy and safety of preventive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for treating vulnerable plaques in diabetic patients remain unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PREVENT (Preventive Coronary Intervention on Stenosis with Functionally Insignificant Vulnerable Plaque) trial was a randomized clinical trial that compared preventive PCI plus optimal medical therapy with optimal medical therapy alone in patients with non-flow-limiting (fractional flow reserve >0.80) vulnerable plaques identified via intracoronary imaging. Randomization was stratified by diabetes status. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, ischaemia-driven target-vessel revascularisation, or hospitalization for unstable or progressive angina at 2 years.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 1606 randomized patients, 490 (30.5%) had diabetes. Diabetic patients underwent PCI for non-target lesions before randomization more frequently than non-diabetics (40.6% vs. 33.8%, P = .009). There were no significant differences in the incidence of the primary endpoint between diabetic and non-diabetic patients [1.8% vs. 1.9%; hazard ratio 0.98; 95% confidence interval 0.45-2.14); P = .956]. However, the primary endpoint at 2 years was less frequent with preventive PCI compared with optimal medical therapy alone in both diabetic (0% vs. 3.7%; P = .004) and non-diabetic patients (0.5% vs. 3.2%; hazard ratio 0.16; 95% confidence interval 0.05-0.55; P = .004), without a significant interaction between diabetic status and randomized strategy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The risk of adverse clinical events was similar between diabetic and non-diabetic patients with non-flow-limiting vulnerable coronary plaques. However, preventive PCI was associated with a lower incidence of the primary endpoint at 2 years, regardless of diabetes status.</p>","PeriodicalId":11976,"journal":{"name":"European Heart Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":37.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-29","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/ehaf273","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 efficacy and safety of preventive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for treating vulnerable plaques in diabetic patients remain unclear.

Methods: The PREVENT (Preventive Coronary Intervention on Stenosis with Functionally Insignificant Vulnerable Plaque) trial was a randomized clinical trial that compared preventive PCI plus optimal medical therapy with optimal medical therapy alone in patients with non-flow-limiting (fractional flow reserve >0.80) vulnerable plaques identified via intracoronary imaging. Randomization was stratified by diabetes status. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, ischaemia-driven target-vessel revascularisation, or hospitalization for unstable or progressive angina at 2 years.

Results: Among 1606 randomized patients, 490 (30.5%) had diabetes. Diabetic patients underwent PCI for non-target lesions before randomization more frequently than non-diabetics (40.6% vs. 33.8%, P = .009). There were no significant differences in the incidence of the primary endpoint between diabetic and non-diabetic patients [1.8% vs. 1.9%; hazard ratio 0.98; 95% confidence interval 0.45-2.14); P = .956]. However, the primary endpoint at 2 years was less frequent with preventive PCI compared with optimal medical therapy alone in both diabetic (0% vs. 3.7%; P = .004) and non-diabetic patients (0.5% vs. 3.2%; hazard ratio 0.16; 95% confidence interval 0.05-0.55; P = .004), without a significant interaction between diabetic status and randomized strategy.

Conclusions: The risk of adverse clinical events was similar between diabetic and non-diabetic patients with non-flow-limiting vulnerable coronary plaques. However, preventive PCI was associated with a lower incidence of the primary endpoint at 2 years, regardless of diabetes status.

预防性经皮冠状动脉介入治疗糖尿病患者易受血流限制的动脉粥样硬化斑块:预防试验。
背景与目的:预防性经皮冠状动脉介入治疗糖尿病易损斑块的有效性和安全性尚不清楚。方法:prevention(血管狭窄伴功能不显著易损斑块的预防性冠状动脉介入治疗)试验是一项随机临床试验,比较通过冠状动脉内显像发现的无血流限制(血流储备分数>0.80)易损斑块患者的预防性PCI +最佳药物治疗与单独最佳药物治疗。随机分组按糖尿病状况分层。主要终点是心源性死亡、靶血管心肌梗死、缺血驱动的靶血管重建术或不稳定或进展性心绞痛住院2年的综合指标。结果:在1606例随机患者中,490例(30.5%)患有糖尿病。在随机分组前,糖尿病患者比非糖尿病患者更频繁地接受非目标病变的PCI治疗(40.6%比33.8%,P = 0.009)。糖尿病和非糖尿病患者的主要终点发生率无显著差异[1.8% vs. 1.9%;风险比0.98;95%置信区间0.45-2.14);P = .956]。然而,在两种糖尿病患者中,预防性PCI治疗2年的主要终点比单独进行最佳药物治疗的发生率低(0% vs 3.7%;P = 0.004)和非糖尿病患者(0.5% vs. 3.2%;风险比0.16;95%置信区间0.05 ~ 0.55;P = 0.004),糖尿病状态与随机化策略之间无显著相互作用。结论:糖尿病患者与非糖尿病患者合并无血流限制的易损冠状动脉斑块发生不良临床事件的风险相似。然而,预防性PCI与2年主要终点发生率较低相关,与糖尿病状态无关。
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