血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂与血管紧张素II 1型受体阻滞剂在成功植入新一代药物洗脱支架后的急性心肌梗死和糖尿病前期患者中的比较。

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Cardiology journal Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-10-08 DOI:10.5603/CJ.a2021.0116
Yong Hoon Kim, Ae-Young Her, Myung Ho Jeong, Byeong-Keuk Kim, Sung-Jin Hong, Sang-Ho Park, Seunghwan Kim, Chul-Min Ahn, Jung-Sun Kim, Young-Guk Ko, Donghoon Choi, Myeong-Ki Hong, Yangsoo Jang
{"title":"血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂与血管紧张素II 1型受体阻滞剂在成功植入新一代药物洗脱支架后的急性心肌梗死和糖尿病前期患者中的比较。","authors":"Yong Hoon Kim, Ae-Young Her, Myung Ho Jeong, Byeong-Keuk Kim, Sung-Jin Hong, Sang-Ho Park, Seunghwan Kim, Chul-Min Ahn, Jung-Sun Kim, Young-Guk Ko, Donghoon Choi, Myeong-Ki Hong, Yangsoo Jang","doi":"10.5603/CJ.a2021.0116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND Because limited data are available, the present study investigated 2-year major clinical outcomes after angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs) therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and prediabetes after successful implantation of newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs). METHODS Overall, 2932 patients with AMI and prediabetes were classified into two groups - the ACEIs group (n = 2059) and the ARBs group (n = 873). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of patient-oriented composite outcome (POCO), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI), or any repeat revascularization. The secondary endpoint was definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST). RESULTS The cumulative incidences of POCO (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.020; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.740-1.404; p = 0.906), all-cause death (aHR: 1.394; 95% CI: 0.803-2.419; p = 0.238), Re-MI (aHR: 1.210; 95% CI: 0.626-2.340; p = 0.570), any repeat revascularization (aHR: 1.150; 95% CI: 0.713-1.855; p = 0.568), and ST (aHR: 1.736; 95% CI: 0.445-6.766; p = 0.427) were similar between the groups. These results were confirmed after propensity score-adjusted analysis. CONCLUSIONS In this study, patients with AMI and prediabetes who received ACEIs or ARBs showed comparable clinical outcomes during the 2-year follow-up period.","PeriodicalId":9492,"journal":{"name":"Cardiology journal","volume":"30 4","pages":"614-626"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/45/09/cardj-30-4-614.PMC10508070.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors versus angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers in patients with acute myocardial infarction and prediabetes after successful implantation of newer-generation drug-eluting stents.\",\"authors\":\"Yong Hoon Kim, Ae-Young Her, Myung Ho Jeong, Byeong-Keuk Kim, Sung-Jin Hong, Sang-Ho Park, Seunghwan Kim, Chul-Min Ahn, Jung-Sun Kim, Young-Guk Ko, Donghoon Choi, Myeong-Ki Hong, Yangsoo Jang\",\"doi\":\"10.5603/CJ.a2021.0116\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND Because limited data are available, the present study investigated 2-year major clinical outcomes after angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs) therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and prediabetes after successful implantation of newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs). METHODS Overall, 2932 patients with AMI and prediabetes were classified into two groups - the ACEIs group (n = 2059) and the ARBs group (n = 873). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of patient-oriented composite outcome (POCO), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI), or any repeat revascularization. The secondary endpoint was definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST). RESULTS The cumulative incidences of POCO (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.020; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.740-1.404; p = 0.906), all-cause death (aHR: 1.394; 95% CI: 0.803-2.419; p = 0.238), Re-MI (aHR: 1.210; 95% CI: 0.626-2.340; p = 0.570), any repeat revascularization (aHR: 1.150; 95% CI: 0.713-1.855; p = 0.568), and ST (aHR: 1.736; 95% CI: 0.445-6.766; p = 0.427) were similar between the groups. These results were confirmed after propensity score-adjusted analysis. CONCLUSIONS In this study, patients with AMI and prediabetes who received ACEIs or ARBs showed comparable clinical outcomes during the 2-year follow-up period.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9492,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cardiology journal\",\"volume\":\"30 4\",\"pages\":\"614-626\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/45/09/cardj-30-4-614.PMC10508070.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cardiology journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5603/CJ.a2021.0116\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/10/8 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiology journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5603/CJ.a2021.0116","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/10/8 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:由于可用数据有限,本研究调查了成功植入新一代药物洗脱支架(DESs)后,急性心肌梗死(AMI)和糖尿病前期患者接受血管紧张素转换酶抑制剂(ACEIs)和血管紧张素II 1型受体阻滞剂(ARBs)治疗后2年的主要临床结果。方法:总的来说,2932名AMI和糖尿病前期患者被分为两组——ACEIs组(n=2059)和ARBs组(n=873)。主要终点是以患者为导向的复合结果(POCO)的发生,定义为全因死亡、复发性心肌梗死(Re-MI)或任何重复的血运重建。次要终点为明确或可能的支架血栓形成(ST)。结果:POCO(调整后的危险比[aHR]:1.020;95%置信区间[CI]:0.740-1.404;p=0.906)、全因死亡(aHR:1.394;95%CI:0.803-24.19;p=0.238)、再心肌梗死(aHR:12.10;95%CI:0.26-2.340;p=0.570)、任何重复血运重建(aHR:1.150;95%CI:0.713-1.855;p=0.568)、,ST(aHR:1.736;95%可信区间:0.445-6.766;p=0.427)在两组之间相似。这些结果在倾向评分调整分析后得到证实。结论:在这项研究中,接受ACEIs或ARBs治疗的AMI和糖尿病前期患者在2年的随访期内表现出可比的临床结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors versus angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers in patients with acute myocardial infarction and prediabetes after successful implantation of newer-generation drug-eluting stents.

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors versus angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers in patients with acute myocardial infarction and prediabetes after successful implantation of newer-generation drug-eluting stents.

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors versus angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers in patients with acute myocardial infarction and prediabetes after successful implantation of newer-generation drug-eluting stents.

Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors versus angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers in patients with acute myocardial infarction and prediabetes after successful implantation of newer-generation drug-eluting stents.
BACKGROUND Because limited data are available, the present study investigated 2-year major clinical outcomes after angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II type 1 receptor blockers (ARBs) therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and prediabetes after successful implantation of newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs). METHODS Overall, 2932 patients with AMI and prediabetes were classified into two groups - the ACEIs group (n = 2059) and the ARBs group (n = 873). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of patient-oriented composite outcome (POCO), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI), or any repeat revascularization. The secondary endpoint was definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST). RESULTS The cumulative incidences of POCO (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.020; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.740-1.404; p = 0.906), all-cause death (aHR: 1.394; 95% CI: 0.803-2.419; p = 0.238), Re-MI (aHR: 1.210; 95% CI: 0.626-2.340; p = 0.570), any repeat revascularization (aHR: 1.150; 95% CI: 0.713-1.855; p = 0.568), and ST (aHR: 1.736; 95% CI: 0.445-6.766; p = 0.427) were similar between the groups. These results were confirmed after propensity score-adjusted analysis. CONCLUSIONS In this study, patients with AMI and prediabetes who received ACEIs or ARBs showed comparable clinical outcomes during the 2-year follow-up period.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cardiology journal
Cardiology journal CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
10.30%
发文量
188
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Cardiology Journal is a scientific, peer-reviewed journal covering a broad spectrum of topics in cardiology. The journal has been published since 1994 and over the years it has become an internationally recognized journal of cardiological and medical community. Cardiology Journal is the journal for practicing cardiologists, researchers, and young trainees benefiting from broad spectrum of useful educational content.
×
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