{"title":"药物包被球囊与药物洗脱支架治疗大血管新生冠状动脉病变的疗效和安全性比较:随机对照试验的研究水平荟萃分析","authors":"Bing Sun, Xu Tong Zhang, Rui Rui Chen","doi":"10.1007/s10557-023-07526-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Drug-coated balloons (DCB) can be used as an alternative to drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with de novo small vessel coronary artery disease. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of solely using DCB versus DES in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for de novo coronary lesions in large vessels.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A database search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and http://Clinicaltrials.gov for trials comparing DCB only with DES in treating de novo coronary lesions in large vessels. Efficacy outcomes included coronary angiography (CAG), follow-up minimal lumen diameter (MLD), and late luminal loss (LLL). Safety outcomes included target lesion failure [TLF: cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR)] and their individual components.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included seven randomized control trials (RCTs) with 816 patients, of which 422 and 394 patients were in the DCB and DES groups, respectively. MLD measured during the 6-12 months follow-up in the DCB group was statistically significantly smaller than in the DES group (MD -0.21, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.07, P = 0.003, I<sup>2</sup> = 52%). LLL measured at 6-12 months follow-up was statistically significantly lower in the DCB group than in the DES group (MD -0.13, 95% CI -0.22 to -0.05, P = 0.003, I<sup>2</sup> = 60%). TLF, cardiac death, MI, and TLR, were not statistically significantly different between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Use of DCB was associated with less LLL at 6-12 months than DES and was not associated with any increase in adverse clinical events. This data suggests DCB are as effective in treating de novo coronary lesions in large vessels as DES.</p>","PeriodicalId":9557,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"1375-1384"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of Efficacy and Safety Between Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Drug-Eluting Stents in the Treatment of De Novo Coronary Lesions in Large Vessels: A Study-Level Meta-Analysis of Randomized Control Trials.\",\"authors\":\"Bing Sun, Xu Tong Zhang, Rui Rui Chen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10557-023-07526-0\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Drug-coated balloons (DCB) can be used as an alternative to drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with de novo small vessel coronary artery disease. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of solely using DCB versus DES in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for de novo coronary lesions in large vessels.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A database search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and http://Clinicaltrials.gov for trials comparing DCB only with DES in treating de novo coronary lesions in large vessels. Efficacy outcomes included coronary angiography (CAG), follow-up minimal lumen diameter (MLD), and late luminal loss (LLL). Safety outcomes included target lesion failure [TLF: cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR)] and their individual components.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included seven randomized control trials (RCTs) with 816 patients, of which 422 and 394 patients were in the DCB and DES groups, respectively. MLD measured during the 6-12 months follow-up in the DCB group was statistically significantly smaller than in the DES group (MD -0.21, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.07, P = 0.003, I<sup>2</sup> = 52%). LLL measured at 6-12 months follow-up was statistically significantly lower in the DCB group than in the DES group (MD -0.13, 95% CI -0.22 to -0.05, P = 0.003, I<sup>2</sup> = 60%). TLF, cardiac death, MI, and TLR, were not statistically significantly different between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Use of DCB was associated with less LLL at 6-12 months than DES and was not associated with any increase in adverse clinical events. This data suggests DCB are as effective in treating de novo coronary lesions in large vessels as DES.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9557,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1375-1384\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10557-023-07526-0\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10557-023-07526-0","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:药物包被球囊(DCB)可作为药物洗脱支架(DES)的替代方案用于新发小血管冠状动脉疾病患者。本研究旨在评估单独使用DCB与DES进行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)治疗大血管新发冠状动脉病变的有效性和安全性。方法:检索PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane Library和http://Clinicaltrials.gov数据库,比较DCB与DES治疗大血管新生冠状动脉病变的临床试验。疗效指标包括冠状动脉造影(CAG)、随访最小管腔直径(MLD)和晚期管腔损失(LLL)。安全性结局包括靶病变失败[TLF:心源性死亡、心肌梗死(MI)、靶病变血运重建术(TLR)]及其各自的组成部分。结果:我们纳入7项随机对照试验(RCTs),共纳入816例患者,其中DCB组422例,DES组394例。DCB组随访6-12个月MLD测量值显著小于DES组(MD -0.21, 95% CI -0.34 ~ -0.07, P = 0.003, I2 = 52%)。DCB组6-12个月随访时LLL测量值显著低于DES组(MD -0.13, 95% CI -0.22 ~ -0.05, P = 0.003, I2 = 60%)。两组间TLF、心源性死亡、MI、TLR差异无统计学意义。结论:使用DCB在6-12个月时的LLL比使用DES低,并且与不良临床事件的增加无关。这些数据表明DCB在治疗大血管新生冠状动脉病变方面与DES一样有效。
Comparison of Efficacy and Safety Between Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Drug-Eluting Stents in the Treatment of De Novo Coronary Lesions in Large Vessels: A Study-Level Meta-Analysis of Randomized Control Trials.
Background: Drug-coated balloons (DCB) can be used as an alternative to drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with de novo small vessel coronary artery disease. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of solely using DCB versus DES in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for de novo coronary lesions in large vessels.
Method: A database search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and http://Clinicaltrials.gov for trials comparing DCB only with DES in treating de novo coronary lesions in large vessels. Efficacy outcomes included coronary angiography (CAG), follow-up minimal lumen diameter (MLD), and late luminal loss (LLL). Safety outcomes included target lesion failure [TLF: cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR)] and their individual components.
Results: We included seven randomized control trials (RCTs) with 816 patients, of which 422 and 394 patients were in the DCB and DES groups, respectively. MLD measured during the 6-12 months follow-up in the DCB group was statistically significantly smaller than in the DES group (MD -0.21, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.07, P = 0.003, I2 = 52%). LLL measured at 6-12 months follow-up was statistically significantly lower in the DCB group than in the DES group (MD -0.13, 95% CI -0.22 to -0.05, P = 0.003, I2 = 60%). TLF, cardiac death, MI, and TLR, were not statistically significantly different between the two groups.
Conclusion: Use of DCB was associated with less LLL at 6-12 months than DES and was not associated with any increase in adverse clinical events. This data suggests DCB are as effective in treating de novo coronary lesions in large vessels as DES.
期刊介绍:
Designed to objectively cover the process of bench to bedside development of cardiovascular drug, device and cell therapy, and to bring you the information you need most in a timely and useful format, Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy takes a fresh and energetic look at advances in this dynamic field.
Homing in on the most exciting work being done on new therapeutic agents, Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy focusses on developments in atherosclerosis, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, ischemic syndromes and arrhythmias. The Journal is an authoritative source of current and relevant information that is indispensable for basic and clinical investigators aiming for novel, breakthrough research as well as for cardiologists seeking to best serve their patients.
Providing you with a single, concise reference tool acknowledged to be among the finest in the world, Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy is listed in Web of Science and PubMed/Medline among other abstracting and indexing services. The regular articles and frequent special topical issues equip you with an up-to-date source defined by the need for accurate information on an ever-evolving field. Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy is a careful and accurate guide through the maze of new products and therapies which furnishes you with the details on cardiovascular pharmacology that you will refer to time and time again.