大面积新发冠状动脉疾病中药物涂层球囊与支架的比较:一项系统性回顾和 RCT 数据的 Meta 分析。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-25 DOI:10.1007/s10557-024-07548-2
Zhiqiang Ma, Kanling Liu, Yanhui Hu, Xiwen Hu, Binyu Wang, Zhengyi Li
{"title":"大面积新发冠状动脉疾病中药物涂层球囊与支架的比较:一项系统性回顾和 RCT 数据的 Meta 分析。","authors":"Zhiqiang Ma, Kanling Liu, Yanhui Hu, Xiwen Hu, Binyu Wang, Zhengyi Li","doi":"10.1007/s10557-024-07548-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Although a number of studies involving small-vessel de novo coronary disease showed clinical benefits of drug-coated balloons (DCB), the role of DCB in large vessel lesions is still unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched main electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DCB with stents for large vessel de novo coronary artery disease. The primary endpoint was major cardiovascular adverse events (MACE), composite cardiovascular death (CD), myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study included 7 RCTs with 770 participants. DCB were associated with a marked risk reduction in MACE [Risk Ratio (RR): 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24 to 0.97; P = 0.04], TLR (RR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.14; P = 0.10), and late lumen loss [standard mean difference (SMD): -0.57; 95% CI: -1.09 to -0.05; P = 0.03] as compared with stents. There is no significant difference in MI (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.21 to 1.54; P = 0.27), CD (RR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.06 to 1.78; P = 0.19), and minimal lumen diameter (SMD: -0.34; 95% CI: -0.72 to 0.05; P = 0.08) between groups. In subgroup analyses, the risk reduction of MACE persisted in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (RR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.89; P = 0.03), and patients receiving DCB vs. bare metal stent (RR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.73; P = 0.01). In addition, there was no significant difference between the DCB group and the drug eluting stent group for MACE (RR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.30 to 1.60; P = 0.38).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DCB may be an effective therapeutic option in patients with large vessel de novo coronary artery disease.</p>","PeriodicalId":9557,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"677-686"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12116820/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison Between Drug-Coated Balloon and Stents in Large De Novo Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of RCT Data.\",\"authors\":\"Zhiqiang Ma, Kanling Liu, Yanhui Hu, Xiwen Hu, Binyu Wang, Zhengyi Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10557-024-07548-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Although a number of studies involving small-vessel de novo coronary disease showed clinical benefits of drug-coated balloons (DCB), the role of DCB in large vessel lesions is still unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched main electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DCB with stents for large vessel de novo coronary artery disease. The primary endpoint was major cardiovascular adverse events (MACE), composite cardiovascular death (CD), myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This study included 7 RCTs with 770 participants. DCB were associated with a marked risk reduction in MACE [Risk Ratio (RR): 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24 to 0.97; P = 0.04], TLR (RR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.14; P = 0.10), and late lumen loss [standard mean difference (SMD): -0.57; 95% CI: -1.09 to -0.05; P = 0.03] as compared with stents. There is no significant difference in MI (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.21 to 1.54; P = 0.27), CD (RR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.06 to 1.78; P = 0.19), and minimal lumen diameter (SMD: -0.34; 95% CI: -0.72 to 0.05; P = 0.08) between groups. In subgroup analyses, the risk reduction of MACE persisted in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (RR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.89; P = 0.03), and patients receiving DCB vs. bare metal stent (RR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.73; P = 0.01). In addition, there was no significant difference between the DCB group and the drug eluting stent group for MACE (RR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.30 to 1.60; P = 0.38).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DCB may be an effective therapeutic option in patients with large vessel de novo coronary artery disease.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9557,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"677-686\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12116820/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10557-024-07548-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/25 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/s10557-024-07548-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:尽管一些涉及小血管新生冠状动脉疾病的研究显示药物涂层球囊(DCB)具有临床疗效,但 DCB 在大血管病变中的作用仍不明确:我们在主要电子数据库中搜索了对大血管新生冠状动脉疾病进行 DCB 与支架比较的随机对照试验 (RCT)。主要终点是主要心血管不良事件(MACE)、复合心血管死亡(CD)、心肌梗死(MI)或靶病变血运重建(TLR):这项研究包括 7 项研究,共有 770 名参与者。DCB可显著降低MACE风险[风险比(RR):0.48;95%置信区间(RR):0.48]:0.48;95% 置信区间 [CI]:0.24至0.97;P = 0.04]、TLR(RR:0.53;95% CI:0.25至1.14;P = 0.10)和晚期管腔缺损[标准平均差(SMD):-0.57;95% CI:-1.09至-0.05;P = 0.03]。各组间的 MI(RR:0.58;95% CI:0.21 至 1.54;P = 0.27)、CD(RR:0.33;95% CI:0.06 至 1.78;P = 0.19)和最小管腔直径(SMD:-0.34;95% CI:-0.72 至 0.05;P = 0.08)无明显差异。在亚组分析中,慢性冠状动脉综合征患者(RR:0.25;95% CI:0.07 至 0.89;P = 0.03)和接受 DCB 与裸金属支架的患者(RR:0.19;95% CI:0.05 至 0.73;P = 0.01)的 MACE 风险持续降低。此外,DCB组与药物洗脱支架组在MACE方面无明显差异(RR:0.69;95% CI:0.30至1.60;P = 0.38):结论:DCB可能是大血管新生冠状动脉疾病患者的有效治疗选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Comparison Between Drug-Coated Balloon and Stents in Large De Novo Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of RCT Data.

Comparison Between Drug-Coated Balloon and Stents in Large De Novo Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of RCT Data.

Purpose: Although a number of studies involving small-vessel de novo coronary disease showed clinical benefits of drug-coated balloons (DCB), the role of DCB in large vessel lesions is still unclear.

Methods: We searched main electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DCB with stents for large vessel de novo coronary artery disease. The primary endpoint was major cardiovascular adverse events (MACE), composite cardiovascular death (CD), myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR).

Results: This study included 7 RCTs with 770 participants. DCB were associated with a marked risk reduction in MACE [Risk Ratio (RR): 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24 to 0.97; P = 0.04], TLR (RR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.14; P = 0.10), and late lumen loss [standard mean difference (SMD): -0.57; 95% CI: -1.09 to -0.05; P = 0.03] as compared with stents. There is no significant difference in MI (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.21 to 1.54; P = 0.27), CD (RR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.06 to 1.78; P = 0.19), and minimal lumen diameter (SMD: -0.34; 95% CI: -0.72 to 0.05; P = 0.08) between groups. In subgroup analyses, the risk reduction of MACE persisted in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (RR: 0.25; 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.89; P = 0.03), and patients receiving DCB vs. bare metal stent (RR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.73; P = 0.01). In addition, there was no significant difference between the DCB group and the drug eluting stent group for MACE (RR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.30 to 1.60; P = 0.38).

Conclusion: DCB may be an effective therapeutic option in patients with large vessel de novo coronary artery disease.

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
Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy
Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
110
审稿时长
4.5 months
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.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信