CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

左主干支架

Abstract

Recommended Article

Bayesian Interpretation of the EXCEL Trial and Other Randomized Clinical Trials of Left Main Coronary Artery Revascularization Optimizing outcomes during left main percutaneous coronary intervention with intravascular ultrasound and fractional flow reserve: the current state of evidence Incidence and Management of Restenosis After Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Disease With Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents (from Failure in Left Main Study With 2nd Generation Stents-Cardiogroup III Study) Revascularization of left main coronary artery 10-Year Outcomes of Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease EXCELling in Left Main Intervention 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?

Clinical Trial2012 Jul;5(7):708-17.

JOURNAL:JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Everolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis. The PRECOMBAT-2 (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) study

Kim YH, Park DW, PRECOMBAT-2 Investigators. Keywords: bypass surgery; coronary disease; left main coronary disease; stents

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - This study sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis.


BACKGROUND - The clinical benefit of second-generation DES for ULMCA stenosis has not been determined.

METHODS - The authors assessed 334 consecutive patients who received everolimus-eluting stents (EES) for ULMCA stenosis between 2009 and 2010. The 18-month incidence rates of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE), including death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (TVR), were compared with those of a randomized study comparing patients who received sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) (n = 327) or coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG) (n = 272).

RESULTS - EES (8.9%) showed a comparable incidence of MACCE as SES (10.8%; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] of EES: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51 to 1.40; p = 0.51) and CABG (6.7%, aHR of EES: 1.40; 95% CI: 0.78 to 2.54; p = 0.26). The composite incidence of death, MI, or stroke also did not differ among patients receiving EES (3.3%), SES (3.7%; aHR of EES: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.27 to 1.47; p = 0.29), and CABG (4.8%; aHR of EES: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.29 to 1.54; p = 0.34). However, the incidence of ischemia-driven TVR in the EES group (6.5%) was higher than in the CABG group (2.6%, aHR of EES: 2.77; 95% CI: 1.17 to 6.58; p = 0.02), but comparable to SES (8.2%, aHR of EES: 1.14; 95% CI: 0.64 to 2.06; p = 0.65). Angiographic restenosis rates were similar in the SES and EES groups (13.8% vs. 9.2%, p = 0.16).

CONCLUSIONS - Second-generation EES had a similar 18-month risk of MACCE for ULMCA stenosis as first-generation SES or CABG.

TRIAL REGISTRATION - ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01348022.

Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.