多支冠状动脉疾病患者的血运重建策略:贝叶斯网络荟萃分析

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery Pub Date : 2022-06-01 DOI:10.1093/icvts/ivab376
Jef Van den Eynde, Katrien Bomhals, Dries Noé, Xander Jacquemyn, Keir McCutcheon, Johan Bennett, John D Puskas, Wouter Oosterlinck
{"title":"多支冠状动脉疾病患者的血运重建策略:贝叶斯网络荟萃分析","authors":"Jef Van den Eynde,&nbsp;Katrien Bomhals,&nbsp;Dries Noé,&nbsp;Xander Jacquemyn,&nbsp;Keir McCutcheon,&nbsp;Johan Bennett,&nbsp;John D Puskas,&nbsp;Wouter Oosterlinck","doi":"10.1093/icvts/ivab376","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Treatment modalities for multivessel disease have rapidly evolved, yet the preferred strategy remains controversial. This meta-analysis compared outcomes after on-pump (ONCAB), off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or hybrid coronary revascularization. A comprehensive search for observational studies and randomized controlled trials published by August 2020 was performed. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted for early (<30 days) and late (>12 months) outcomes. A total of 119 studies were included (n = 700 458 patients). The main analysis was confined to 31 randomized controlled trials (n = 24 932 patients). PCI was associated with lower early mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-0.79] and stroke (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06-0.60) rates compared with ONCAB, whereas a reduced risk of early myocardial infarction was observed with OPCAB compared with ONCAB (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32-0.83). Late target vessel revascularization and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were both increased with PCI compared with ONCAB, OPCAB and hybrid coronary revascularization (by 127-203% and 59-64%, respectively), and late major adverse cardiac events were increased in PCI compared with ONCAB and OPCAB (by 64% and 59%). However, PCI was associated with a significantly lower risk of late stroke compared with ONCAB (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.89). Sensitivity analyses (i) including observational studies and (ii) limiting to studies with recent cohorts confirmed the findings of the main analysis. Surgical approaches for revascularization remain superior to PCI in patients with multivessel disease. Hybrid coronary revascularization might be viable for some patients, although more evidence from randomized controlled trials is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":13621,"journal":{"name":"Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery","volume":"34 6","pages":"947-957"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/2b/54/ivab376.PMC9159431.pdf","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revascularization strategies in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Jef Van den Eynde,&nbsp;Katrien Bomhals,&nbsp;Dries Noé,&nbsp;Xander Jacquemyn,&nbsp;Keir McCutcheon,&nbsp;Johan Bennett,&nbsp;John D Puskas,&nbsp;Wouter Oosterlinck\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/icvts/ivab376\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Treatment modalities for multivessel disease have rapidly evolved, yet the preferred strategy remains controversial. This meta-analysis compared outcomes after on-pump (ONCAB), off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or hybrid coronary revascularization. A comprehensive search for observational studies and randomized controlled trials published by August 2020 was performed. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted for early (<30 days) and late (>12 months) outcomes. A total of 119 studies were included (n = 700 458 patients). The main analysis was confined to 31 randomized controlled trials (n = 24 932 patients). PCI was associated with lower early mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-0.79] and stroke (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06-0.60) rates compared with ONCAB, whereas a reduced risk of early myocardial infarction was observed with OPCAB compared with ONCAB (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32-0.83). Late target vessel revascularization and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were both increased with PCI compared with ONCAB, OPCAB and hybrid coronary revascularization (by 127-203% and 59-64%, respectively), and late major adverse cardiac events were increased in PCI compared with ONCAB and OPCAB (by 64% and 59%). However, PCI was associated with a significantly lower risk of late stroke compared with ONCAB (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.89). Sensitivity analyses (i) including observational studies and (ii) limiting to studies with recent cohorts confirmed the findings of the main analysis. Surgical approaches for revascularization remain superior to PCI in patients with multivessel disease. Hybrid coronary revascularization might be viable for some patients, although more evidence from randomized controlled trials is warranted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13621,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery\",\"volume\":\"34 6\",\"pages\":\"947-957\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/2b/54/ivab376.PMC9159431.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivab376\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivab376","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

多血管疾病的治疗方式迅速发展,但首选策略仍然存在争议。这项荟萃分析比较了有泵(ONCAB)、无泵冠状动脉旁路移植术(OPCAB)、经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)或混合冠状动脉重建术后的结果。对2020年8月前发表的观察性研究和随机对照试验进行了全面检索。对早期(12个月)结果进行贝叶斯网络meta分析。共纳入119项研究(n = 700 458例患者)。主要分析限于31项随机对照试验(n = 24932例患者)。与ONCAB相比,PCI具有较低的早期死亡率[比值比(OR) 0.50, 95%可信区间(CI) 0.31-0.79]和卒中发生率(OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06-0.60),而与ONCAB相比,OPCAB具有较低的早期心肌梗死风险(OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32-0.83)。与ONCAB、OPCAB和混合型冠状动脉重建术相比,PCI的晚期靶血管重建术和心脑血管重大不良事件均增加(分别增加127-203%和59-64%),PCI的晚期主要心脏不良事件比ONCAB和OPCAB增加(分别增加64%和59%)。然而,与ONCAB相比,PCI与晚期卒中的风险显著降低(OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.89)。敏感性分析(i)包括观察性研究,(ii)限于近期队列研究,证实了主要分析的结果。对于多血管疾病患者,外科手术的血运重建术优于PCI。混合冠状动脉重建术可能对一些患者是可行的,尽管更多的证据来自随机对照试验的保证。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Revascularization strategies in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: a Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Treatment modalities for multivessel disease have rapidly evolved, yet the preferred strategy remains controversial. This meta-analysis compared outcomes after on-pump (ONCAB), off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or hybrid coronary revascularization. A comprehensive search for observational studies and randomized controlled trials published by August 2020 was performed. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted for early (<30 days) and late (>12 months) outcomes. A total of 119 studies were included (n = 700 458 patients). The main analysis was confined to 31 randomized controlled trials (n = 24 932 patients). PCI was associated with lower early mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-0.79] and stroke (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06-0.60) rates compared with ONCAB, whereas a reduced risk of early myocardial infarction was observed with OPCAB compared with ONCAB (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.32-0.83). Late target vessel revascularization and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were both increased with PCI compared with ONCAB, OPCAB and hybrid coronary revascularization (by 127-203% and 59-64%, respectively), and late major adverse cardiac events were increased in PCI compared with ONCAB and OPCAB (by 64% and 59%). However, PCI was associated with a significantly lower risk of late stroke compared with ONCAB (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.89). Sensitivity analyses (i) including observational studies and (ii) limiting to studies with recent cohorts confirmed the findings of the main analysis. Surgical approaches for revascularization remain superior to PCI in patients with multivessel disease. Hybrid coronary revascularization might be viable for some patients, although more evidence from randomized controlled trials is warranted.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery
Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
292
审稿时长
2-4 weeks
期刊介绍: Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery (ICVTS) publishes scientific contributions in the field of cardiovascular and thoracic surgery, covering all aspects of surgery of the heart, vessels and the chest. The journal publishes a range of article types including: Best Evidence Topics; Brief Communications; Case Reports; Original Articles; State-of-the-Art; Work in Progress Report.
期刊最新文献
Local tumour residue after microwave ablation for lung cancer: a case report. Long-term outcomes of papillary muscle relocation anteriorly for functional mitral regurgitation. Postoperative aortic injury caused by a staple line formed during wedge resection of the lung. Surgical management of cardiac cystic echinococcosis in a paediatric patient: a case report. Congenital aortocaval fistula combined with patent ductus arteriosus in an infant: a case report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1