混合冠状动脉血运重建术与经皮冠状动脉介入术的重复血运重建需求。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Postepy W Kardiologii Interwencyjnej Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-17 DOI:10.5114/aic.2024.140903
Łukasz Szymański, Natalia Gołąbek, Jakub Piórek, Witold Gerber, Piotr P Buszman, Krzysztof Sanetra
{"title":"混合冠状动脉血运重建术与经皮冠状动脉介入术的重复血运重建需求。","authors":"Łukasz Szymański, Natalia Gołąbek, Jakub Piórek, Witold Gerber, Piotr P Buszman, Krzysztof Sanetra","doi":"10.5114/aic.2024.140903","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Hybrid coronary revascularisation (HCR), being a treatment path combining both coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) approaches, offers the advantages of both methods in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease. Since available literature provides few studies comparing the need for repeat revascularisation (RR) after HCR in comparison to PCI, our review aimed at summarising the latest data on this topic from the last 5 years (2018-2023). The search was conducted within the PubMed and Embase databases, followed by application of inclusion and exclusion criteria and providing a summary of data and characteristics of eligible studies. On the basis of 7 records included in the final analysis, RR and/or follow-up target vessel revascularisation (TVR) were significantly less frequently required in the case of HCR than in PCI in 3 out of 7 records, whereas the remaining four provided no significant differences in analysed rates between the 2 therapeutic pathways. When it comes to lowering the necessity for follow-up TVR and/or RR in a fraction of instances, HCR demonstrates a significant advantage over PCI. The complexity of outcomes associated with these therapies is emphasised by the fact that no statistically significant differences were observed between the 2 methods in the remaining 4 records.</p>","PeriodicalId":49678,"journal":{"name":"Postepy W Kardiologii Interwencyjnej","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11249877/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Need for repeat revascularisation in hybrid coronary revascularisation vs. percutaneous coronary intervention.\",\"authors\":\"Łukasz Szymański, Natalia Gołąbek, Jakub Piórek, Witold Gerber, Piotr P Buszman, Krzysztof Sanetra\",\"doi\":\"10.5114/aic.2024.140903\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Hybrid coronary revascularisation (HCR), being a treatment path combining both coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) approaches, offers the advantages of both methods in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease. Since available literature provides few studies comparing the need for repeat revascularisation (RR) after HCR in comparison to PCI, our review aimed at summarising the latest data on this topic from the last 5 years (2018-2023). The search was conducted within the PubMed and Embase databases, followed by application of inclusion and exclusion criteria and providing a summary of data and characteristics of eligible studies. On the basis of 7 records included in the final analysis, RR and/or follow-up target vessel revascularisation (TVR) were significantly less frequently required in the case of HCR than in PCI in 3 out of 7 records, whereas the remaining four provided no significant differences in analysed rates between the 2 therapeutic pathways. When it comes to lowering the necessity for follow-up TVR and/or RR in a fraction of instances, HCR demonstrates a significant advantage over PCI. The complexity of outcomes associated with these therapies is emphasised by the fact that no statistically significant differences were observed between the 2 methods in the remaining 4 records.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49678,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Postepy W Kardiologii Interwencyjnej\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11249877/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Postepy W Kardiologii Interwencyjnej\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5114/aic.2024.140903\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Postepy W Kardiologii Interwencyjnej","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5114/aic.2024.140903","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

混合冠状动脉血运重建(HCR)是一种结合了冠状动脉旁路移植术和经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)两种方法的治疗途径,为多血管冠状动脉疾病患者提供了两种方法的优势。由于现有文献中很少有比较 HCR 和 PCI 术后重复血管再通(RR)需求的研究,我们的综述旨在总结过去 5 年(2018-2023 年)有关这一主题的最新数据。我们在 PubMed 和 Embase 数据库中进行了检索,随后应用了纳入和排除标准,并提供了符合条件的研究的数据和特征摘要。根据纳入最终分析的 7 条记录,在 7 条记录中,有 3 条记录显示 HCR 所需的 RR 和/或随访靶血管血运重建(TVR)明显少于 PCI,而其余 4 条记录则显示这两种治疗途径的分析率没有显著差异。在降低随访 TVR 和/或 RR 的必要性方面,HCR 比 PCI 有明显优势。在其余4份记录中,两种治疗方法在统计学上无显著差异,这突出了这些疗法相关结果的复杂性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Need for repeat revascularisation in hybrid coronary revascularisation vs. percutaneous coronary intervention.

Hybrid coronary revascularisation (HCR), being a treatment path combining both coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) approaches, offers the advantages of both methods in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease. Since available literature provides few studies comparing the need for repeat revascularisation (RR) after HCR in comparison to PCI, our review aimed at summarising the latest data on this topic from the last 5 years (2018-2023). The search was conducted within the PubMed and Embase databases, followed by application of inclusion and exclusion criteria and providing a summary of data and characteristics of eligible studies. On the basis of 7 records included in the final analysis, RR and/or follow-up target vessel revascularisation (TVR) were significantly less frequently required in the case of HCR than in PCI in 3 out of 7 records, whereas the remaining four provided no significant differences in analysed rates between the 2 therapeutic pathways. When it comes to lowering the necessity for follow-up TVR and/or RR in a fraction of instances, HCR demonstrates a significant advantage over PCI. The complexity of outcomes associated with these therapies is emphasised by the fact that no statistically significant differences were observed between the 2 methods in the remaining 4 records.

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
Postepy W Kardiologii Interwencyjnej
Postepy W Kardiologii Interwencyjnej 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
15.40%
发文量
36
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej/Advances in Interventional Cardiology is indexed in: Index Copernicus, Ministry of Science and Higher Education Index (MNiSW). Advances in Interventional Cardiology is a quarterly aimed at specialists, mainly at cardiologists and cardiosurgeons. Official journal of the Association on Cardiovascular Interventions of the Polish Cardiac Society.
×
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