在心脏科不同治疗单元接受治疗的冠心病患者的预后:一项回顾性队列研究。

IF 0.2 Q4 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
International journal of clinical and experimental medicine Pub Date : 2015-09-15 eCollection Date: 2015-01-01
Cong Fu, Yuyu Yao, Xin Wang, Chaojun Yu, Genshan Ma
{"title":"在心脏科不同治疗单元接受治疗的冠心病患者的预后:一项回顾性队列研究。","authors":"Cong Fu, Yuyu Yao, Xin Wang, Chaojun Yu, Genshan Ma","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a major health problem in global. Benefit from different care unit for various type of CAD is remaining unknown. We investigate if coronary care unit (CCU) reduces the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>806 CAD patients including stable angina (SA) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who treated in department of cardiology were involved in the study as two groups. Each group involved two subgroups according to the therapy unit including CCU and normal unit. 12-48 months follow-up was carried out. The primary end point was all cause mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For SA, death from any cause occurred in 1.0% of the patients in the normal group (1 of 108), as compared with 5.1% in the CCU group (3 of 59) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.164; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.017 to 1.580; P=0.118). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the two subgroups with respect to the risk of death (P=0.074), revascularization (P=0.660), stroke (P=0.497), heart failure (P=0.658) and hemorrhage (P=0.096). For ACS, death occurred in 1.9% of the patients in the normal subgroup (5 of 267), as compared with 1.3% in the CCU subgroup (5 of 372) (HR, 1.403; 95% CI, 0.406-4.846; P=0.593). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the two subgroups with respect to the risk of death (P=0.591), revascularization (P=0.996), stroke (P=0.425), heart failure (P=0.625).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CAD patients treated in CCU obtain little benefits compared with normal.</p>","PeriodicalId":13892,"journal":{"name":"International journal of clinical and experimental medicine","volume":"8 9","pages":"15657-65"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4658949/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prognosis of patients with coronary artery disease treated in different therapy units at department of cardiology: a retrospective cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Cong Fu, Yuyu Yao, Xin Wang, Chaojun Yu, Genshan Ma\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a major health problem in global. Benefit from different care unit for various type of CAD is remaining unknown. We investigate if coronary care unit (CCU) reduces the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>806 CAD patients including stable angina (SA) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who treated in department of cardiology were involved in the study as two groups. Each group involved two subgroups according to the therapy unit including CCU and normal unit. 12-48 months follow-up was carried out. The primary end point was all cause mortality.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>For SA, death from any cause occurred in 1.0% of the patients in the normal group (1 of 108), as compared with 5.1% in the CCU group (3 of 59) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.164; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.017 to 1.580; P=0.118). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the two subgroups with respect to the risk of death (P=0.074), revascularization (P=0.660), stroke (P=0.497), heart failure (P=0.658) and hemorrhage (P=0.096). For ACS, death occurred in 1.9% of the patients in the normal subgroup (5 of 267), as compared with 1.3% in the CCU subgroup (5 of 372) (HR, 1.403; 95% CI, 0.406-4.846; P=0.593). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the two subgroups with respect to the risk of death (P=0.591), revascularization (P=0.996), stroke (P=0.425), heart failure (P=0.625).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>CAD patients treated in CCU obtain little benefits compared with normal.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13892,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of clinical and experimental medicine\",\"volume\":\"8 9\",\"pages\":\"15657-65\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4658949/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of clinical and experimental medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2015/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of clinical and experimental medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:冠状动脉疾病(CAD)是全球主要的健康问题。对于不同类型的冠状动脉疾病,不同护理单元的益处尚不清楚。我们研究了冠心病监护病房(CCU)是否能降低主要不良心血管事件(MACEs)的发生率。方法:806 名在心内科接受治疗的冠心病患者(包括稳定型心绞痛(SA)和急性冠脉综合征(ACS))分为两组参与研究。每组根据治疗单元(包括 CCU 和普通单元)分为两个亚组。随访期为 12-48 个月。主要终点是各种原因导致的死亡率:就 SA 而言,正常组有 1.0% 的患者(108 例中有 1 例)死于各种原因,而 CCU 组有 5.1% 的患者(59 例中有 3 例)死于各种原因(危险比 [HR],0.164;95% 置信区间 [CI],0.017 至 1.580;P=0.118)。卡普兰-梅耶生存分析显示,两个亚组在死亡风险(P=0.074)、血管重建(P=0.660)、中风(P=0.497)、心力衰竭(P=0.658)和出血(P=0.096)方面没有显著差异。就ACS而言,正常亚组有1.9%的患者死亡(267例中有5例),而CCU亚组有1.3%的患者死亡(372例中有5例)(HR,1.403;95% CI,0.406-4.846;P=0.593)。Kaplan-Meier生存分析显示,两个亚组在死亡风险(P=0.591)、血管重建(P=0.996)、中风(P=0.425)和心力衰竭(P=0.625)方面没有显著差异:结论:在CCU接受治疗的CAD患者与普通患者相比获益甚微。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prognosis of patients with coronary artery disease treated in different therapy units at department of cardiology: a retrospective cohort study.

Background: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a major health problem in global. Benefit from different care unit for various type of CAD is remaining unknown. We investigate if coronary care unit (CCU) reduces the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs).

Method: 806 CAD patients including stable angina (SA) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who treated in department of cardiology were involved in the study as two groups. Each group involved two subgroups according to the therapy unit including CCU and normal unit. 12-48 months follow-up was carried out. The primary end point was all cause mortality.

Results: For SA, death from any cause occurred in 1.0% of the patients in the normal group (1 of 108), as compared with 5.1% in the CCU group (3 of 59) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.164; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.017 to 1.580; P=0.118). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the two subgroups with respect to the risk of death (P=0.074), revascularization (P=0.660), stroke (P=0.497), heart failure (P=0.658) and hemorrhage (P=0.096). For ACS, death occurred in 1.9% of the patients in the normal subgroup (5 of 267), as compared with 1.3% in the CCU subgroup (5 of 372) (HR, 1.403; 95% CI, 0.406-4.846; P=0.593). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed that there were no significant differences between the two subgroups with respect to the risk of death (P=0.591), revascularization (P=0.996), stroke (P=0.425), heart failure (P=0.625).

Conclusion: CAD patients treated in CCU obtain little benefits compared with normal.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Information not localized
×
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