CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

双重抗血小板治疗持续时间

Abstract

Recommended Article

Evolution of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a 40-year journey Individualized antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent deployment: Implication of clinical trials of different durations of dual antiplatelet therapy Extended antiplatelet therapy with clopidogrel alone versus clopidogrel plus aspirin after completion of 9- to 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy for acute coronary syndrome patients with both high bleeding and ischemic risk. Rationale and design of the OPT-BIRISK double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial Long-term dual antiplatelet-induced intestinal injury resulting in translocation of intestinal bacteria into blood circulation increased the incidence of adverse events after PCI in patients with coronary artery disease Safety and efficacy of the bioabsorbable polymer everolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents in high-risk patients undergoing PCI: TWILIGHT-SYNERGY Higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) increases the risk of suboptimal platelet inhibition and major cardiovascular ischemic events among ACS patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor Dual Antiplatelet TherapyIs It Time to Cut the Cord With Aspirin? 6-month versus 12-month or longer dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndrome (SMART-DATE): a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial

Review Article2017 Mar;185:26-34.

JOURNAL:Am J Cardiol. Article Link

Intravascular ultrasound-guided vs angiography-guided drug-eluting stent implantation in complex coronary lesions: Meta-analysis of randomized trials

Bavishi C, Sardar P, Stone GW et al. Keywords: IVUS; RCT; PCI; DES; complex coronary lesions; outcome

ABSTRACT

The relative outcomes of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with angiography-guided PCI with drug-eluting stent (DES) in complex lesions have not been established. We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of IVUS-guided PCI with angiography-guided PCI in patients with complex coronary lesions treated with DES.


METHODS - Electronic databases were searched to identify all randomized trials comparing IVUS-guided vs angiography-guided DES implantation. We evaluated major adverse cardiac events (MACE), all-cause and cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and stent thrombosis outcomes at the longest reported follow-up. Random-effects modeling was used to calculate pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% CIs.

RESULTS - Eight trials comprising 3,276 patients (1,635 IVUS-guided and 1,641 angiography-guided) enrolling only patients with complex lesions were included. Mean follow-up was 1.4±0.5years. Compared with angiography-guided PCI, patients undergoing IVUS-guided PCI had significantly lower MACE (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.51-0.80, P=.0001), TLR (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.86, P=.004), and TVR (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.42-0.87, P=.007). There were no significant differences for stent thrombosis, cardiovascular death, or all-cause death. In meta-regression analysis, IVUS-guided PCI was of greatest benefit in reducing MACE in patients with acute coronary syndromes, diabetes, and long lesions.

CONCLUSIONS - The present meta-analysis demonstrates a significant reduction in MACE, TVR, and TLR with IVUS-guided DES implantation in complex coronary lesions.

Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.