慢性全闭塞患者临时与分期经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的住院和3年临床结果——一项现实世界的实践

Hsiu-Yu Fang , Wei-Chieh Lee , Hesham Hussein , Chih-Yuan Fang , Cheng-I Cheng , Cheng-Hsu Yang , Chien-Jen Chen , Chi-Ling Hang , Hon-Kan Yip , Yu-Sheng Lin , Chiung-Jen Wu
{"title":"慢性全闭塞患者临时与分期经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的住院和3年临床结果——一项现实世界的实践","authors":"Hsiu-Yu Fang ,&nbsp;Wei-Chieh Lee ,&nbsp;Hesham Hussein ,&nbsp;Chih-Yuan Fang ,&nbsp;Cheng-I Cheng ,&nbsp;Cheng-Hsu Yang ,&nbsp;Chien-Jen Chen ,&nbsp;Chi-Ling Hang ,&nbsp;Hon-Kan Yip ,&nbsp;Yu-Sheng Lin ,&nbsp;Chiung-Jen Wu","doi":"10.1016/j.ijchv.2014.06.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) which was performed immediately after diagnostic catheterization has become the most common way of coronary intervention. However, limited data is available on in-hospital and long-term outcome comparing ad hoc and staged chronic total occlusion (CTO) PCI. The aim of our study was to figure the short-term and long-term outcomes after ad hoc or staged CTO PCI.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This retrospective analysis included 512 consecutive patients that underwent 561 CTO PCI procedures between January 2002 and December 2009. Patient basic demographics, lesion characteristics, interventional procedure, devices used and in-hospital outcomes were compared between ad hoc and staged CTO PCI groups. 3-Year clinical outcomes that included all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), the need for coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG), major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and target vessel revascularization (TVR) were compared. Time-to-event analyses were performed using Kaplan–Meier statistics.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Four hundred fifty-one patients (80.4%) were enrolled in ad hoc CTO PCI group. Final successful revascularization was higher in ad hoc CTO PCI group compared with staged CTO PCI group (82.9 vs. 77.3%, <em>p</em> = 0.17) without statistical significance. There was no significant difference between ad hoc CTO PCI and staged CTO PCI groups in in-hospital outcomes such as all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, urgent bypass surgery, urgent PCI or complications. Patients with ad hoc CTO PCI had lower rate of all-cause mortality (6.2% vs. 6.5%, <em>p</em> = 0.89), the need for CABG (1.9% vs. 2.1%, <em>p</em> = 0.89) but higher rate of cardiac mortality (1.7% vs. 0.0%, <em>p</em> = 0.21), MI (1.0% vs. 0.0%, <em>p</em> = 0.34), MACE (24.1% vs. 17.5%, <em>p</em> = 0.19) and TVR (17.8% vs. 10.0%, <em>p</em> = 0.069) without statistical significance in 3-year clinical outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>3-Year clinical outcomes compared with ad hoc CTO PCI and staged CTO PCI had insignificant differences between: all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, MI, the need for CABG, MACE and TVR.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":90542,"journal":{"name":"International journal of cardiology. Heart & vessels","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ijchv.2014.06.012","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"In-hospital and 3-year clinical outcomes following ad hoc versus staged percutaneous coronary interventions in chronic total occlusion — A real world practice\",\"authors\":\"Hsiu-Yu Fang ,&nbsp;Wei-Chieh Lee ,&nbsp;Hesham Hussein ,&nbsp;Chih-Yuan Fang ,&nbsp;Cheng-I Cheng ,&nbsp;Cheng-Hsu Yang ,&nbsp;Chien-Jen Chen ,&nbsp;Chi-Ling Hang ,&nbsp;Hon-Kan Yip ,&nbsp;Yu-Sheng Lin ,&nbsp;Chiung-Jen Wu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijchv.2014.06.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) which was performed immediately after diagnostic catheterization has become the most common way of coronary intervention. However, limited data is available on in-hospital and long-term outcome comparing ad hoc and staged chronic total occlusion (CTO) PCI. The aim of our study was to figure the short-term and long-term outcomes after ad hoc or staged CTO PCI.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This retrospective analysis included 512 consecutive patients that underwent 561 CTO PCI procedures between January 2002 and December 2009. Patient basic demographics, lesion characteristics, interventional procedure, devices used and in-hospital outcomes were compared between ad hoc and staged CTO PCI groups. 3-Year clinical outcomes that included all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), the need for coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG), major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and target vessel revascularization (TVR) were compared. Time-to-event analyses were performed using Kaplan–Meier statistics.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Four hundred fifty-one patients (80.4%) were enrolled in ad hoc CTO PCI group. Final successful revascularization was higher in ad hoc CTO PCI group compared with staged CTO PCI group (82.9 vs. 77.3%, <em>p</em> = 0.17) without statistical significance. There was no significant difference between ad hoc CTO PCI and staged CTO PCI groups in in-hospital outcomes such as all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, urgent bypass surgery, urgent PCI or complications. Patients with ad hoc CTO PCI had lower rate of all-cause mortality (6.2% vs. 6.5%, <em>p</em> = 0.89), the need for CABG (1.9% vs. 2.1%, <em>p</em> = 0.89) but higher rate of cardiac mortality (1.7% vs. 0.0%, <em>p</em> = 0.21), MI (1.0% vs. 0.0%, <em>p</em> = 0.34), MACE (24.1% vs. 17.5%, <em>p</em> = 0.19) and TVR (17.8% vs. 10.0%, <em>p</em> = 0.069) without statistical significance in 3-year clinical outcomes.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>3-Year clinical outcomes compared with ad hoc CTO PCI and staged CTO PCI had insignificant differences between: all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, MI, the need for CABG, MACE and TVR.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":90542,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of cardiology. Heart & vessels\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.ijchv.2014.06.012\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of cardiology. Heart & vessels\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214763214000510\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of cardiology. Heart & vessels","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214763214000510","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

背景经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)在诊断性置管后立即进行,已成为最常见的冠状动脉介入治疗方式。然而,比较临时和分期慢性全闭塞PCI (CTO)的住院和长期结果的数据有限。我们研究的目的是计算临时或分期CTO PCI后的短期和长期结果。方法回顾性分析2002年1月至2009年12月期间512例连续接受561例CTO PCI手术的患者。比较临时和分期CTO PCI组患者的基本人口统计学特征、病变特征、介入程序、使用的器械和住院结果。比较3年的临床结果,包括全因死亡率、心脏死亡率、心肌梗死(MI)、冠状动脉搭桥手术(CABG)的必要性、主要心脏不良事件(MACE)和靶血管重建术(TVR)。使用Kaplan-Meier统计进行时间-事件分析。结果入组451例(80.4%)。临时CTO PCI组最终血运重建率高于分期CTO PCI组(82.9% vs 77.3%, p = 0.17),但无统计学意义。在全因死亡率、心源性死亡、心肌梗死、紧急搭桥手术、紧急PCI或并发症等院内结局方面,临时CTO PCI组与分期CTO PCI组之间无显著差异。临时性CTO PCI患者的全因死亡率(6.2% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.89)、CABG必要性(1.9% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.89)较低,但心脏死亡率(1.7% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.21)、心肌梗死(1.0% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.34)、MACE (24.1% vs. 17.5%, p = 0.19)和TVR (17.8% vs. 10.0%, p = 0.069)较高,3年临床结果无统计学意义。结论与临时CTO PCI和分期CTO PCI相比,3年临床结果:全因死亡率、心脏死亡率、心肌梗死、冠脉搭桥必要性、MACE和TVR差异均无统计学意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
In-hospital and 3-year clinical outcomes following ad hoc versus staged percutaneous coronary interventions in chronic total occlusion — A real world practice

Background

Ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) which was performed immediately after diagnostic catheterization has become the most common way of coronary intervention. However, limited data is available on in-hospital and long-term outcome comparing ad hoc and staged chronic total occlusion (CTO) PCI. The aim of our study was to figure the short-term and long-term outcomes after ad hoc or staged CTO PCI.

Methods

This retrospective analysis included 512 consecutive patients that underwent 561 CTO PCI procedures between January 2002 and December 2009. Patient basic demographics, lesion characteristics, interventional procedure, devices used and in-hospital outcomes were compared between ad hoc and staged CTO PCI groups. 3-Year clinical outcomes that included all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), the need for coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG), major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and target vessel revascularization (TVR) were compared. Time-to-event analyses were performed using Kaplan–Meier statistics.

Results

Four hundred fifty-one patients (80.4%) were enrolled in ad hoc CTO PCI group. Final successful revascularization was higher in ad hoc CTO PCI group compared with staged CTO PCI group (82.9 vs. 77.3%, p = 0.17) without statistical significance. There was no significant difference between ad hoc CTO PCI and staged CTO PCI groups in in-hospital outcomes such as all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, urgent bypass surgery, urgent PCI or complications. Patients with ad hoc CTO PCI had lower rate of all-cause mortality (6.2% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.89), the need for CABG (1.9% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.89) but higher rate of cardiac mortality (1.7% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.21), MI (1.0% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.34), MACE (24.1% vs. 17.5%, p = 0.19) and TVR (17.8% vs. 10.0%, p = 0.069) without statistical significance in 3-year clinical outcomes.

Conclusion

3-Year clinical outcomes compared with ad hoc CTO PCI and staged CTO PCI had insignificant differences between: all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, MI, the need for CABG, MACE and TVR.

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:481959085
Book学术官方微信