S. Khan, A. Khan, Jasia Bukhari, Muhammad Idrees Khan, Imad Uddin
{"title":"药物洗脱球囊与药物洗脱支架治疗急性冠脉综合征支架内再狭窄(ISR)患者的疗效比较","authors":"S. Khan, A. Khan, Jasia Bukhari, Muhammad Idrees Khan, Imad Uddin","doi":"10.58889/pjcvi.3.31.36","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Currently, patients with coronary artery disease are advised to use coronary stenting as their primary revascularization method. This study aims to compare outcome of MACE after DEB Vs DES in treatment of patients within stent restenosis (ISR) presented with chest pain. \nMethodology: The current study was Quasi experimental study carried out at the Department of Cardiology, MTI-HMC Peshawar for duration of six months from 21 April 2021 to 21 Nov 2021. In this study, 94 patients in DEB group and 94 patients in DES group were followed for 06 months to look for development of MACE. All data was collected through a well-defined proforma. Data was entered on computer software SPSS version 22. \nResults: In DEB group, 52 (55.3%) male patients and 42 (44.7%) female patients were recorded whereas in DES group, 57 (60.6%) male patients while 37 (39.4%) female patients were recorded. In DEB group, 15 (16.0%) patients were recorded with MACE whereas in DES group, 38 (40.4%) patients were recorded with MACE. \nConclusion: Our study showed that DEB is superior to DES in the management of in-stent restenosis and results in fewer major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), so DEB may be considered as a treatment option for CAD patients admitted to our setting in in order to reduce mortality and morbidity associated to restenosis in such patients.","PeriodicalId":438573,"journal":{"name":"Pakistan Journal of Cardiovascular Intervention","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative outcomes of MACE after Drug eluting balloon Vs. Drug Eluting Stent in treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) patients presented with acute coronary syndrome.\",\"authors\":\"S. Khan, A. Khan, Jasia Bukhari, Muhammad Idrees Khan, Imad Uddin\",\"doi\":\"10.58889/pjcvi.3.31.36\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Currently, patients with coronary artery disease are advised to use coronary stenting as their primary revascularization method. This study aims to compare outcome of MACE after DEB Vs DES in treatment of patients within stent restenosis (ISR) presented with chest pain. \\nMethodology: The current study was Quasi experimental study carried out at the Department of Cardiology, MTI-HMC Peshawar for duration of six months from 21 April 2021 to 21 Nov 2021. In this study, 94 patients in DEB group and 94 patients in DES group were followed for 06 months to look for development of MACE. All data was collected through a well-defined proforma. Data was entered on computer software SPSS version 22. \\nResults: In DEB group, 52 (55.3%) male patients and 42 (44.7%) female patients were recorded whereas in DES group, 57 (60.6%) male patients while 37 (39.4%) female patients were recorded. In DEB group, 15 (16.0%) patients were recorded with MACE whereas in DES group, 38 (40.4%) patients were recorded with MACE. \\nConclusion: Our study showed that DEB is superior to DES in the management of in-stent restenosis and results in fewer major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), so DEB may be considered as a treatment option for CAD patients admitted to our setting in in order to reduce mortality and morbidity associated to restenosis in such patients.\",\"PeriodicalId\":438573,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pakistan Journal of Cardiovascular Intervention\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pakistan Journal of Cardiovascular Intervention\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.58889/pjcvi.3.31.36\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pakistan Journal of Cardiovascular Intervention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58889/pjcvi.3.31.36","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:目前,建议冠状动脉疾病患者使用冠状动脉支架植入术作为其主要的血运重建方法。本研究旨在比较DEB与DES治疗支架再狭窄(ISR)患者胸痛的效果。方法学:目前的研究是在MTI-HMC白沙瓦心脏病学系进行的准实验研究,为期六个月,从2021年4月21日至2021年11月21日。本研究对DEB组94例患者和DES组94例患者进行随访,随访时间为06个月,观察MACE的发展情况。所有数据都是通过定义明确的形式收集的。数据在计算机软件SPSS version 22中输入。结果:DEB组男性52例(55.3%),女性42例(44.7%);DES组男性57例(60.6%),女性37例(39.4%)。DEB组有15例(16.0%)患者发生MACE, DES组有38例(40.4%)患者发生MACE。结论:我们的研究表明,DEB在处理支架内再狭窄方面优于DES,并且导致更少的主要不良心血管事件(MACE),因此DEB可以作为我们收治的CAD患者的治疗选择,以降低此类患者与再狭窄相关的死亡率和发病率。
Comparative outcomes of MACE after Drug eluting balloon Vs. Drug Eluting Stent in treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) patients presented with acute coronary syndrome.
Background: Currently, patients with coronary artery disease are advised to use coronary stenting as their primary revascularization method. This study aims to compare outcome of MACE after DEB Vs DES in treatment of patients within stent restenosis (ISR) presented with chest pain.
Methodology: The current study was Quasi experimental study carried out at the Department of Cardiology, MTI-HMC Peshawar for duration of six months from 21 April 2021 to 21 Nov 2021. In this study, 94 patients in DEB group and 94 patients in DES group were followed for 06 months to look for development of MACE. All data was collected through a well-defined proforma. Data was entered on computer software SPSS version 22.
Results: In DEB group, 52 (55.3%) male patients and 42 (44.7%) female patients were recorded whereas in DES group, 57 (60.6%) male patients while 37 (39.4%) female patients were recorded. In DEB group, 15 (16.0%) patients were recorded with MACE whereas in DES group, 38 (40.4%) patients were recorded with MACE.
Conclusion: Our study showed that DEB is superior to DES in the management of in-stent restenosis and results in fewer major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), so DEB may be considered as a treatment option for CAD patients admitted to our setting in in order to reduce mortality and morbidity associated to restenosis in such patients.