Journal of cardiovascular medicine (Hagerstown, Md.) · 2020
Spontaneous coronary artery dissection managed with a conservative or revascularization approach: a meta-analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Jamil Adeel, Tajrishi Farbod Z, Kahe Farima, Najafi Homa, Montazerin Sahar M, Shojaei Fahimehalsadat, Chitsazan Mandana, Chitsazan Mitra, Liu Yuyin, Chi Gerald
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment approach for spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) remains unclear.
OBJECTIVES: The study aims to compare in-hospital and long-term clinical outcomes of SCAD patients initially managed with medical therapy (conservative approach) versus percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting (revascularization approach) based on published data.
METHODS: We identified relevant studies by performing a systematic search in the Ovid MEDLINE and Embase databases. Studies with N at least 10 that report in-hospital outcomes [death, myocardial infarction (MI) and revascularization] or long-term outcomes (death, MI, revascularization, SCAD recurrence, and heart failure) were included. Risk difference between conservative and revascularization approach was estimated with the inverse variance-weighted method in a fixed-effect or random-effect model.
RESULTS: A total of 22 nonrandomized, observational studies were analyzed (N = 1435). Compared with the initial revascularization approach, the conservative approach was associated with a comparable risk of in-hospital outcomes [risk difference: death, -0.61% (95% confidence interval, -2.13-0.91%), P = 0.43; MI, -0.99% (-4.65-2.67%), P = 0.60; revascularization, -3.02% (-8.79-2.75%), P = 0.31] and long-term outcomes [death, -0.06% (-2.33-2.20%), P = 0.96; MI, 0.96% (-2.35-4.27%), P = 0.57; revascularization, -3.31% (-7.63-1.02%), P = 0.13; SCAD recurrence, 3.75% (-2.05-9.55%), P = 0.21; heart failure, -0.01% (-3.13-3.11%), P = 0.99]. There was no significant heterogeneity across these studies.
CONCLUSION: Pooled results suggest that SCAD patients initially managed with a conservative strategy may have similar in-hospital and long-term outcomes compared with those who received revascularization in the absence of ongoing ischemia or left main artery involvement. More data from prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings.
OBJECTIVES: The study aims to compare in-hospital and long-term clinical outcomes of SCAD patients initially managed with medical therapy (conservative approach) versus percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting (revascularization approach) based on published data.
METHODS: We identified relevant studies by performing a systematic search in the Ovid MEDLINE and Embase databases. Studies with N at least 10 that report in-hospital outcomes [death, myocardial infarction (MI) and revascularization] or long-term outcomes (death, MI, revascularization, SCAD recurrence, and heart failure) were included. Risk difference between conservative and revascularization approach was estimated with the inverse variance-weighted method in a fixed-effect or random-effect model.
RESULTS: A total of 22 nonrandomized, observational studies were analyzed (N = 1435). Compared with the initial revascularization approach, the conservative approach was associated with a comparable risk of in-hospital outcomes [risk difference: death, -0.61% (95% confidence interval, -2.13-0.91%), P = 0.43; MI, -0.99% (-4.65-2.67%), P = 0.60; revascularization, -3.02% (-8.79-2.75%), P = 0.31] and long-term outcomes [death, -0.06% (-2.33-2.20%), P = 0.96; MI, 0.96% (-2.35-4.27%), P = 0.57; revascularization, -3.31% (-7.63-1.02%), P = 0.13; SCAD recurrence, 3.75% (-2.05-9.55%), P = 0.21; heart failure, -0.01% (-3.13-3.11%), P = 0.99]. There was no significant heterogeneity across these studies.
CONCLUSION: Pooled results suggest that SCAD patients initially managed with a conservative strategy may have similar in-hospital and long-term outcomes compared with those who received revascularization in the absence of ongoing ischemia or left main artery involvement. More data from prospective studies are warranted to validate these findings.