药物洗脱支架作为治疗膝以下外周动脉疾病的一种方法:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 0.7
Prakash Krishnan, Arthur Tarricone, Allen Gee, Dong Won Lee, Jayati Mehta, Lawrence A Lavery, Samin Sharma
{"title":"药物洗脱支架作为治疗膝以下外周动脉疾病的一种方法:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Prakash Krishnan, Arthur Tarricone, Allen Gee, Dong Won Lee, Jayati Mehta, Lawrence A Lavery, Samin Sharma","doi":"10.1177/15385744251358129","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>PurposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of drug eluting stents with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and bare-metal stents in below the knee peripheral artery disease. <b>Methods</b>: The systematic review was registered in Research Registry. A literature search was performed across four databases: PubMed, Medline/Embase, Cochrane Review, and Web of Science for eligible comparative studies. The primary outcomes examined were mortality, major amputation (above the ankle), minor amputation (below the ankle), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). A random effects model was used when pooling outcomes to account for heterogeneity.Main FindingsA total of 7 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. All subjects were treated for below the knee lesions and CLTI was confirmed as Rutherford ≥4 in 669/955 (70.0%). Among the studies, 572 were treated with a drug eluting stents and 477 treated with non-DES modalities. Pooled analysis showed that DES significantly reduced minor amputations and CD-TLR, O.R = 0.56 [0.32, 0.96], and O.R = 0.38 [0.25, 0.60], respectively. In subgroup analysis, paclitaxel eluting stents were not associated with either survival or major amputation. Everolimus/sirolimus eluting stent use was associated with reduced CD-TLR, O.R = 0.36 [0.21, 0.61].ConclusionThis study suggests that Drug-Eluting Stents (DES), irrespective of type, provide protection against minor amputations and CD-TLR. However, they do not seem to have a significant impact on overall survival rates or the risk of major amputations.</p>","PeriodicalId":94265,"journal":{"name":"Vascular and endovascular surgery","volume":" ","pages":"15385744251358129"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Drug Eluting Stents as a Management for Patients with Below the Knee Peripheral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Prakash Krishnan, Arthur Tarricone, Allen Gee, Dong Won Lee, Jayati Mehta, Lawrence A Lavery, Samin Sharma\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15385744251358129\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>PurposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of drug eluting stents with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and bare-metal stents in below the knee peripheral artery disease. <b>Methods</b>: The systematic review was registered in Research Registry. A literature search was performed across four databases: PubMed, Medline/Embase, Cochrane Review, and Web of Science for eligible comparative studies. The primary outcomes examined were mortality, major amputation (above the ankle), minor amputation (below the ankle), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). A random effects model was used when pooling outcomes to account for heterogeneity.Main FindingsA total of 7 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. All subjects were treated for below the knee lesions and CLTI was confirmed as Rutherford ≥4 in 669/955 (70.0%). Among the studies, 572 were treated with a drug eluting stents and 477 treated with non-DES modalities. Pooled analysis showed that DES significantly reduced minor amputations and CD-TLR, O.R = 0.56 [0.32, 0.96], and O.R = 0.38 [0.25, 0.60], respectively. In subgroup analysis, paclitaxel eluting stents were not associated with either survival or major amputation. Everolimus/sirolimus eluting stent use was associated with reduced CD-TLR, O.R = 0.36 [0.21, 0.61].ConclusionThis study suggests that Drug-Eluting Stents (DES), irrespective of type, provide protection against minor amputations and CD-TLR. However, they do not seem to have a significant impact on overall survival rates or the risk of major amputations.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94265,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vascular and endovascular surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"15385744251358129\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vascular and endovascular surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15385744251358129\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vascular and endovascular surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15385744251358129","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

目的比较药物洗脱支架与经皮腔内血管成形术和裸金属支架治疗膝以下外周动脉病变的有效性和安全性。方法:系统评价在Research Registry注册。在PubMed、Medline/Embase、Cochrane Review和Web of Science四个数据库中进行文献检索,以获得符合条件的比较研究。检查的主要结果是死亡率、主要截肢(踝关节以上)、次要截肢(踝关节以下)和临床驱动的靶病变血运重建(CD-TLR)。在汇总结果时使用随机效应模型来解释异质性。本系统综述和荟萃分析共纳入7项研究。所有受试者均接受膝关节以下病变治疗,669/955(70.0%)的CLTI确诊为Rutherford≥4。在这些研究中,572例采用药物洗脱支架治疗,477例采用非des方式治疗。合并分析显示,DES显著降低了小截肢和CD-TLR,比值比分别为0.56[0.32,0.96]和0.38[0.25,0.60]。在亚组分析中,紫杉醇洗脱支架与生存或主要截肢无关。依维莫司/西罗莫司洗脱支架的使用与CD-TLR降低相关,or = 0.36[0.21, 0.61]。结论药物洗脱支架(DES),无论何种类型,均可预防轻微截肢和CD-TLR。然而,它们似乎对总体存活率或主要截肢的风险没有显著影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Drug Eluting Stents as a Management for Patients with Below the Knee Peripheral Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of drug eluting stents with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and bare-metal stents in below the knee peripheral artery disease. Methods: The systematic review was registered in Research Registry. A literature search was performed across four databases: PubMed, Medline/Embase, Cochrane Review, and Web of Science for eligible comparative studies. The primary outcomes examined were mortality, major amputation (above the ankle), minor amputation (below the ankle), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). A random effects model was used when pooling outcomes to account for heterogeneity.Main FindingsA total of 7 studies were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. All subjects were treated for below the knee lesions and CLTI was confirmed as Rutherford ≥4 in 669/955 (70.0%). Among the studies, 572 were treated with a drug eluting stents and 477 treated with non-DES modalities. Pooled analysis showed that DES significantly reduced minor amputations and CD-TLR, O.R = 0.56 [0.32, 0.96], and O.R = 0.38 [0.25, 0.60], respectively. In subgroup analysis, paclitaxel eluting stents were not associated with either survival or major amputation. Everolimus/sirolimus eluting stent use was associated with reduced CD-TLR, O.R = 0.36 [0.21, 0.61].ConclusionThis study suggests that Drug-Eluting Stents (DES), irrespective of type, provide protection against minor amputations and CD-TLR. However, they do not seem to have a significant impact on overall survival rates or the risk of major amputations.

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
×
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