CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

左主干支架

科研文章

荐读文献

Intravascular ultrasound in the evaluation and treatment of left main coronary artery disease: a consensus statement from the European Bifurcation Club 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 Percutaneous coronary intervention in left main coronary artery disease: the 13th consensus document from the European Bifurcation Club Optimizing outcomes during left main percutaneous coronary intervention with intravascular ultrasound and fractional flow reserve: the current state of evidence 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 with drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting in left main coronary artery disease: an individual patient data meta-analysis 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 Radial versus femoral artery access in patients undergoing PCI for left main coronary artery disease: analysis from the EXCEL trial Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease 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)

Clinical Trial2021 Feb 5;CIRCINTERVENTIONS120010007.

JOURNAL:Circ Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Patient Selection and Clinical Outcomes in the STOPDAPT-2 Trial: An All-Comer Single-Center Registry During the Enrollment Period of the STOPDAPT-2 Randomized Controlled Trial

K Kanenawa, K Yamaji, H Tashiro et al. Keywords: hemorrhage; PCI; stents; outcome; STOPDAPT-2 trial enrollement; risk profile

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - We sought to evaluate the impact of patient selection for the STOPDAPT-2 trial (Short and Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Everolimus-Eluting Cobalt-Chromium Stent-2) on clinical outcomes in a registry from a single center that participated in the STOPDAPT-2 trial.


METHODS - Among 2190 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention using stent in Kokura Memorial Hospital during the enrollment period of the STOPDAPT-2 trial, 521 patients had exclusion criteria such as in-hospital major complications, anticoagulant use, or prior intracranial bleeding (ineligible group). Among 1669 patients who met the eligibility criteria (eligible group), 582 were enrolled (enrolled group) and 1087 were not enrolled (nonenrolled group) in the STOPDAPT-2 trial. The primary outcome measure was defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, stroke, or Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction major and minor bleeding.


RESULTS - Compared with the enrolled group, patients in the nonenrolled group more often had high bleeding risk according to the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk definition (52.6% versus 41.2%; P<0.001) and were frailer according to the Canadian Study of Health and Aging Clinical Frailty Scale (intermediate, 21.4% versus 14.1%; high, 6.4% versus 2.1%; P<0.001). The cumulative 1-year incidences of the primary outcome measure, all-cause death, and major bleeding were significantly higher in the nonenrolled group than in the enrolled group (7.2% versus 4.5%, P=0.03; 4.1% versus 0.9%, P<0.001; and 4.3% versus 2.1%, P=0.03, respectively) and in the ineligible group than in the eligible group (21.2% versus 6.3%, P<0.001; 9.9% versus 3.0%, P<0.001; and 13.5% versus 3.5%, P<0.001, respectively).


CONCLUSIONS - Patients who were ineligible, eligible but not enrolled, and enrolled in the STOPDAPT-2 trial had different risk profiles and clinical outcomes, suggesting important implications in applying the trial results in daily clinical practice.