治疗急性心肌梗死的药物涂层球囊:随机临床试验的 Metaanalysis。

IF 1.6 3区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Journal of interventional cardiology Pub Date : 2022-12-27 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1155/2022/4018771
Yuxuan Zhang, Delong Chen, Qichao Dong, Yi Xu, Jiacheng Fang, Huaqing Zhang, Jun Jiang
{"title":"治疗急性心肌梗死的药物涂层球囊:随机临床试验的 Metaanalysis。","authors":"Yuxuan Zhang, Delong Chen, Qichao Dong, Yi Xu, Jiacheng Fang, Huaqing Zhang, Jun Jiang","doi":"10.1155/2022/4018771","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The role of a drug-coated balloon (DCB) in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is not well established.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five databases were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared DCB with stents in the treatment of AMI from their inception to 30 July 2021. The primary clinical endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). Summary estimations were conducted using fixed-effects analysis complemented by several subgroups. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/CRD42021272886).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 4 randomized controlled trials with 485 patients were included. On routine clinical follow-up, DCB was associated with no difference in the incidence of MACEs compared with control (risk ratio [RR] 0.59 [0.31 to 1.13]; <i>P</i>=0.11). DCB was associated with similar MACEs compared with drug-eluting stent and lower MACEs compared with bare-metal stent. There was no difference between DCB and control in terms of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization, and minimal lumen diameter during follow-up. However, DCB was associated with a lower incidence of myocardial infarction (RR 0.16 [0.03 to 0.90]; <i>P</i>=0.04) and lower late lumen loss (mean difference -0.20 [-0.27 to -0.13]; <i>P</i> < 0.00001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In treatment of patients with AMI, DCB might be a feasible interventional strategy versus control as it associated with comparable clinical outcomes. Future large-volume, well-designed randomized controlled trials to evaluating the role of the DCB in this setting are warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":16329,"journal":{"name":"Journal of interventional cardiology","volume":"2022 ","pages":"4018771"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9810407/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Drug-Coated Balloons for Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Metaanalysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.\",\"authors\":\"Yuxuan Zhang, Delong Chen, Qichao Dong, Yi Xu, Jiacheng Fang, Huaqing Zhang, Jun Jiang\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2022/4018771\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The role of a drug-coated balloon (DCB) in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is not well established.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five databases were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared DCB with stents in the treatment of AMI from their inception to 30 July 2021. The primary clinical endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). Summary estimations were conducted using fixed-effects analysis complemented by several subgroups. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/CRD42021272886).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 4 randomized controlled trials with 485 patients were included. On routine clinical follow-up, DCB was associated with no difference in the incidence of MACEs compared with control (risk ratio [RR] 0.59 [0.31 to 1.13]; <i>P</i>=0.11). DCB was associated with similar MACEs compared with drug-eluting stent and lower MACEs compared with bare-metal stent. There was no difference between DCB and control in terms of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization, and minimal lumen diameter during follow-up. However, DCB was associated with a lower incidence of myocardial infarction (RR 0.16 [0.03 to 0.90]; <i>P</i>=0.04) and lower late lumen loss (mean difference -0.20 [-0.27 to -0.13]; <i>P</i> < 0.00001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In treatment of patients with AMI, DCB might be a feasible interventional strategy versus control as it associated with comparable clinical outcomes. Future large-volume, well-designed randomized controlled trials to evaluating the role of the DCB in this setting are warranted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16329,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of interventional cardiology\",\"volume\":\"2022 \",\"pages\":\"4018771\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9810407/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of interventional cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4018771\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of interventional cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4018771","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:药物涂层球囊(DCB)在治疗急性心肌梗死(AMI)中的作用尚未得到充分确定:方法:在五个数据库中搜索了从开始到 2021 年 7 月 30 日期间比较 DCB 与支架治疗急性心肌梗死的随机对照试验。主要临床终点为主要心脏不良事件(MACE)。采用固定效应分析法并辅以多个亚组进行汇总估算。该方案已在 PROSPERO (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/CRD42021272886) 上注册。结果:结果:共纳入了 4 项随机对照试验,485 例患者。在常规临床随访中,DCB 与对照组相比,MACE 发生率没有差异(风险比 [RR] 0.59 [0.31 至 1.13];P=0.11)。DCB与药物洗脱支架相比,MACE发生率相似,而与裸金属支架相比,MACE发生率较低。在随访期间的全因死亡率、心血管死亡率、支架血栓形成、靶病变血运重建和最小管腔直径方面,DCB与对照组之间没有差异。然而,DCB与较低的心肌梗死发生率(RR 0.16 [0.03 至 0.90];P=0.04)和较低的晚期管腔损失(平均差异 -0.20 [-0.27 至 -0.13];P < 0.00001)相关:在治疗急性心肌梗死患者时,DCB与对照组相比可能是一种可行的介入策略,因为其临床结果相当。未来有必要进行大样本、精心设计的随机对照试验,以评估 DCB 在这种情况下的作用。
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
Drug-Coated Balloons for Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Metaanalysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Background: The role of a drug-coated balloon (DCB) in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is not well established.

Methods: Five databases were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared DCB with stents in the treatment of AMI from their inception to 30 July 2021. The primary clinical endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). Summary estimations were conducted using fixed-effects analysis complemented by several subgroups. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/CRD42021272886).

Results: A total of 4 randomized controlled trials with 485 patients were included. On routine clinical follow-up, DCB was associated with no difference in the incidence of MACEs compared with control (risk ratio [RR] 0.59 [0.31 to 1.13]; P=0.11). DCB was associated with similar MACEs compared with drug-eluting stent and lower MACEs compared with bare-metal stent. There was no difference between DCB and control in terms of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization, and minimal lumen diameter during follow-up. However, DCB was associated with a lower incidence of myocardial infarction (RR 0.16 [0.03 to 0.90]; P=0.04) and lower late lumen loss (mean difference -0.20 [-0.27 to -0.13]; P < 0.00001).

Conclusions: In treatment of patients with AMI, DCB might be a feasible interventional strategy versus control as it associated with comparable clinical outcomes. Future large-volume, well-designed randomized controlled trials to evaluating the role of the DCB in this setting are 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
Journal of interventional cardiology
Journal of interventional cardiology CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
81
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Interventional Cardiology is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that provides a forum for cardiologists determined to stay current in the diagnosis, investigation, and management of patients with cardiovascular disease and its associated complications. The journal publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies focusing on new procedures and techniques in all major subject areas in the field, including: Acute coronary syndrome Coronary disease Congenital heart diseases Myocardial infarction Peripheral arterial disease Valvular heart disease Cardiac hemodynamics and physiology Haemostasis and thrombosis
期刊最新文献
Epidemiological Trends, Etiology, and Burden Study of Heart Failure in China, 1990–2019 A Comparative Analysis of Primary and Bailout ADR in CTO-PCI The Effect of Electromagnetic Interference Produced by Smartphones Using 5G Network on Patients With Permanent Pacemakers (EMS5G-PPM Study) Comparison of Sheathless and Sheathed Guiding Catheters in Transradial Percutaneous Coronary Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using the DynamX Sirolimus-Eluting Bioadaptor: 12-Month Clinical and Imaging Outcomes
×
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