CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

Stenting Left Main

科研文章

荐读文献

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials Comparative effectiveness analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with chronic kidney disease and unprotected left main coronary artery disease Contemporary Use and Trends in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States: An Analysis of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Research to Practice Initiative Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial Long-term outcomes after stenting versus coronary artery bypass grafting for unprotected left main coronary artery disease: 10-year results of bare-metal stents and 5-year results of drug-eluting stents from the ASAN-MAIN (ASAN Medical Center-Left MAIN Revascularization) Registry Revascularization in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease and Left Ventricular Dysfunction 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 Impact of SYNTAX Score on 10-Year Outcomes After Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Optimizing outcomes during left main percutaneous coronary intervention with intravascular ultrasound and fractional flow reserve: the current state of evidence Safety of intermediate left main stenosis revascularization deferral based on fractional flow reserve and intravascular ultrasound: A systematic review and meta-regression including 908 deferred left main stenosis from 12 studies

Clinical Trial2015 Oct 13;66(15):1643-53.

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

10-Year Coronary Heart Disease Risk Prediction Using Coronary Artery Calcium and Traditional Risk Factors: Derivation in the MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) With Validation in the HNR (Heinz Nixdorf Recall) Study and the DHS (Dallas Heart Study)

McClelland RL, Jorgensen NW, Budoff M et al. Keywords: atherosclerosis; coronary disease; epidemiology; risk prediction

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUNDSeveral studies have demonstrated the tremendous potential of using coronary artery calcium (CAC) in addition to traditional risk factors for coronary heart disease (CHD) risk prediction. However, to date, no risk score incorporating CAC has been developed.


OBJECTIVES - The goal of this study was to derive and validate a novel risk score to estimate 10-year CHD risk using CAC and traditional risk factors.

METHODS - Algorithm development was conducted in the MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis), a prospective community-based cohort study of 6,814 participants age 45 to 84 years, who were free of clinical heart disease at baseline and followed for 10 years. MESA is sex balanced and included 39% non-Hispanic whites, 12% Chinese Americans, 28% African Americans, and 22% Hispanic Americans. External validation was conducted in the HNR (Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study) and the DHS (Dallas Heart Study).

RESULTS - Inclusion of CAC in the MESA risk score offered significant improvements in risk prediction (C-statistic 0.80 vs. 0.75; p < 0.0001). External validation in both the HNR and DHS studies provided evidence of very good discrimination and calibration. Harrell's C-statistic was 0.779 in HNR and 0.816 in DHS. Additionally, the difference in estimated 10-year risk between events and nonevents was approximately 8% to 9%, indicating excellent discrimination. Mean calibration, or calibration-in-the-large, was excellent for both studies, with average predicted 10-year risk within one-half of a percent of the observed event rate.

CONCLUSIONS - An accurate estimate of 10-year CHD risk can be obtained using traditional risk factors and CAC. The MESA risk score, which is available online on the MESA web site for easy use, can be used to aid clinicians when communicating risk to patients and when determining risk-based treatment strategies.

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