Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions · 2018
Intravascular Brachytherapy for the Management of Repeated Multimetal-Layered Drug-Eluting Coronary Stent Restenosis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Varghese Mithun J, Bhatheja Samit, Baber Usman, Kezbor Safwan, Chincholi Aditi, Chamaria Surbhi, Buckstein Michael, Bakst Richard, Kini Annapoorna, Sharma Samin
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Because of the widespread acceptance of percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents as an effective treatment strategy for in-stent restenosis, it is common to encounter multimetal layer stent restenosis in the recent years. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of such patients treated with intravascular brachytherapy (IVBT) in comparison with other percutaneous options.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention during the period between 2011 and 2015 for recurrent drug-eluting stents in-stent restenosis with at least 2 layers of stents at the lesion site. This analysis compared patients who underwent treatment with IVBT and those who did not (non-IVBT group). The primary end point measured was major adverse cardiac events defined as a composite of target lesion revascularization, myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality at 12 months. Adjusted associations were measured using propensity score matching. A total of 328 percutaneous coronary intervention patients met the eligibility criteria, of which 197 patients received IVBT, and 131 patients underwent routine percutaneous intervention. The primary end point was significantly lower in patients undergoing IVBT (13.2% and 28.2%; P=0.01). A propensity score matching for risk factors of in-stent restenosis identified 182 patients. The advantages of IVBT with regard to 1-year major adverse cardiac events were confirmed in this matched cohort (13.2% and 30.8%; adjusted hazard ratio [95% CI]: 0.37 [0.18-0.73]; P<0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis, IVBT led to significantly lower major adverse cardiac events in patients with multilayered drug-eluting stents restenosis when compared with other percutaneous options at 1-year follow-up.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention during the period between 2011 and 2015 for recurrent drug-eluting stents in-stent restenosis with at least 2 layers of stents at the lesion site. This analysis compared patients who underwent treatment with IVBT and those who did not (non-IVBT group). The primary end point measured was major adverse cardiac events defined as a composite of target lesion revascularization, myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality at 12 months. Adjusted associations were measured using propensity score matching. A total of 328 percutaneous coronary intervention patients met the eligibility criteria, of which 197 patients received IVBT, and 131 patients underwent routine percutaneous intervention. The primary end point was significantly lower in patients undergoing IVBT (13.2% and 28.2%; P=0.01). A propensity score matching for risk factors of in-stent restenosis identified 182 patients. The advantages of IVBT with regard to 1-year major adverse cardiac events were confirmed in this matched cohort (13.2% and 30.8%; adjusted hazard ratio [95% CI]: 0.37 [0.18-0.73]; P<0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis, IVBT led to significantly lower major adverse cardiac events in patients with multilayered drug-eluting stents restenosis when compared with other percutaneous options at 1-year follow-up.