Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2015
Embolic protection device use and its association with procedural safety and long-term outcomes following saphenous vein graft intervention: An analysis from the British Columbia Cardiac registry.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Iqbal M Bilal, Nadra Imad J, Ding Lillian, Fung Anthony, Aymong Eve, Chan Albert W, Hodge Steven, Della Siega Anthony, Robinson Simon D, British Columbia Cardiac Registry Investigators
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Embolic protection devices (EPDs) have been designed and introduced to reduce distal embolization and peri-procedural myocardial infarction during saphenous vein graft (SVG) intervention. Current guidelines give a class I recommendation to EPD use during SVG intervention when technically feasible. However, the routine use of these devices has recently been debated.
METHODS: We analyzed 1,359 patients undergoing isolated SVG intervention between 2008 and 2013 in the British Columbia Cardiac Registry. We analyzed (a) post-procedural TIMI flow; and (b) target vessel revascularization (TVR) and mortality at 1 and 2 years.
RESULTS: EPD use was an independent predictor of post-procedural TIMI 2/3 flow (OR = 2.38, 95% CI: 1.51-3.74, P < 0.001). At 1 year, EPD use was an independent predictor for lower TVR (HR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.14-0.85, P = 0.021) and a trend towards lower mortality (HR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.18-1.10, P = 0.082). These associations were lost at 2 years where EPD use was not predictive of mortality (HR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.33-1.17, P = 0.144) or TVR (HR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.41-1.17, P = 0.176). These findings were confirmed in propensity-matched and inverse probability treatment weighted analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of patients undergoing SVG intervention, EPD use was a strong predictor for improved post-procedural TIMI flow. Whilst EPD use was associated with lower TVR and a trend for lower mortality at 1 year, these associations were lost at 2 years. These findings would appear to support the use of EPD for SVG intervention. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
METHODS: We analyzed 1,359 patients undergoing isolated SVG intervention between 2008 and 2013 in the British Columbia Cardiac Registry. We analyzed (a) post-procedural TIMI flow; and (b) target vessel revascularization (TVR) and mortality at 1 and 2 years.
RESULTS: EPD use was an independent predictor of post-procedural TIMI 2/3 flow (OR = 2.38, 95% CI: 1.51-3.74, P < 0.001). At 1 year, EPD use was an independent predictor for lower TVR (HR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.14-0.85, P = 0.021) and a trend towards lower mortality (HR = 0.45, 95% CI: 0.18-1.10, P = 0.082). These associations were lost at 2 years where EPD use was not predictive of mortality (HR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.33-1.17, P = 0.144) or TVR (HR = 0.70, 95% CI: 0.41-1.17, P = 0.176). These findings were confirmed in propensity-matched and inverse probability treatment weighted analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of patients undergoing SVG intervention, EPD use was a strong predictor for improved post-procedural TIMI flow. Whilst EPD use was associated with lower TVR and a trend for lower mortality at 1 year, these associations were lost at 2 years. These findings would appear to support the use of EPD for SVG intervention. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AgedAged, 80 and overBritish ColumbiaCoronary Artery BypassCoronary CirculationEmbolic Protection DevicesEmbolismFemaleGraft Occlusion, VascularHumansKaplan-Meier EstimateLogistic ModelsMaleMultivariate AnalysisMyocardial InfarctionOdds RatioPercutaneous Coronary InterventionPropensity ScoreProportional Hazards ModelsProtective FactorsRegional Blood FlowRegistriesRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsSaphenous VeinTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeVascular Patency