CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

Stenting Left Main

科研文章

荐读文献

Differential prognostic impact of treatment strategy among patients with left main versus non-left main bifurcation lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) Registry II Long-Term Outcomes of Different Two-Stent Techniques With Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents for Unprotected Left Main Bifurcation Disease: Insights From the FAILS-2 Study Complex PCI procedures: challenges for the interventional cardiologist EXCELling in Left Main Intervention Long-term outcomes following mini-crush versus culotte stenting for the treatment of unprotected left main disease: insights from the Milan and New-Tokyo (MITO) registry Operator Experience and Outcomes After Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Left Main Revascularization in 2017: Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention? Long-term safety and effectiveness of unprotected left main coronary stenting with drug-eluting stents compared with bare-metal stents Mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting for coronary artery disease: a pooled analysis of individual patient data Clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients treated with everolimus-eluting stents or first-generation Paclitaxel-eluting stents for unprotected left main disease

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.