CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

左主干支架

科研文章

荐读文献

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes and Optimal Stent Strategy in Left Main Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Left Main Revascularization in 2017: Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention? A randomized clinical study comparing double kissing crush with provisional stenting for treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions: results from the DKCRUSH-II (Double Kissing Crush versus Provisional Stenting Technique for Treatment of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions) trial Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease Self-expandable sirolimus-eluting stents compared to second-generation drug-eluting stents for the treatment of the left main: A propensity score analysis from the SPARTA and the FAILS-2 registries Intravascular ultrasound in the evaluation and treatment of left main coronary artery disease: a consensus statement from the European Bifurcation Club Unprotected Left Main Disease: Indications and Optimal Strategies for Percutaneous Intervention Access Site and Outcomes for Unprotected Left Main Stem Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Analysis of the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society Database Radial versus femoral artery access in patients undergoing PCI for left main coronary artery disease: analysis from the EXCEL trial Ten-Year All-Cause Death According to Completeness of Revascularization in Patients With Three-Vessel Disease or Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Insights From the SYNTAX Extended Survival Study
|<<... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 >>|

Clinical Trial2015 May 26;65(20):2198-206.

JOURNAL：J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Randomized Trial of Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: 5-Year Outcomes of the PRECOMBAT Study

Ahn JM, Roh JH, Park SJ et al. Keywords: coronary artery bypass grafting; long-term outcome; percutaneous coronary intervention

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - In a previous randomized trial, we found that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was not inferior to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis at 1 year.


OBJECTIVES - This study sought to determine the 5-year outcomes of PCI compared with CABG for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis.

METHODS - We randomly assigned 600 patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis to undergo PCI with a sirolimus-eluting stent (n = 300) or CABG (n = 300). The primary endpoint was a major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (MACCE: a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization) and compared on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS - At 5 years, MACCE occurred in 52 patients in the PCI group and 42 patients in the CABG group (cumulative event rates of 17.5% and 14.3%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84 to 1.90; p = 0.26). The 2 groups did not differ significantly in terms of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or stroke as well as their composite (8.4% and 9.6%; HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.52; p = 0.66). Ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization occurred more frequently in the PCI group than in the CABG group (11.4% and 5.5%, respectively; HR: 2.11; 95% CI: 1.16 to 3.84; p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS - During 5 years of follow-up, our study did not show significant difference regarding the rate of MACCE between patients who underwent PCI with a sirolimus-eluting stent and those who underwent CABG. However, considering the limited power of our study, our results should be interpreted with caution. (Bypass Surgery Versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease [PRECOMBAT]; NCT00422968).

Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 注册

> CBS 2019 会议日程

> CBS 2019 学术征集

> CBS 2019 热点

 CBSMD

> CBSMD 网站注册

> 教育中心

> 荐读文献

> Top 10 阅读文献

> 文献导读
CBS 2019 CBS 2019 主席团 教育中心 科研动态
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top