中度冠状动脉狭窄和延期血管重建患者抗血小板疗法的安全性和有效性。

IF 7.2 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Revista española de cardiología (English ed.) Pub Date : 2024-11-12 DOI:10.1016/j.rec.2024.11.001
David Hong, Seung Hun Lee, Jihye Heo, Doosup Shin, Juhee Cho, Eliseo Guallar, Hyun Sung Joh, Hyun Kuk Kim, Junho Ha, Ki Hong Choi, Taek Kyu Park, Jeong Hoon Yang, Young Bin Song, Joo-Yong Hahn, Seung-Hyuk Choi, Hyeon-Cheol Gwon, Danbee Kang, Joo Myung Lee
{"title":"中度冠状动脉狭窄和延期血管重建患者抗血小板疗法的安全性和有效性。","authors":"David Hong, Seung Hun Lee, Jihye Heo, Doosup Shin, Juhee Cho, Eliseo Guallar, Hyun Sung Joh, Hyun Kuk Kim, Junho Ha, Ki Hong Choi, Taek Kyu Park, Jeong Hoon Yang, Young Bin Song, Joo-Yong Hahn, Seung-Hyuk Choi, Hyeon-Cheol Gwon, Danbee Kang, Joo Myung Lee","doi":"10.1016/j.rec.2024.11.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction and objectives: </strong>This study investigated the safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy in patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis who underwent deferred revascularization due to their fractional flow reserve (FFR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A nationwide cohort study was conducted using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. A total of 4657 patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis who underwent deferred revascularization due to their FFR were identified from 2013 to 2020. FFR was indicated in patients with no prior evidence of myocardial ischemia and intermediate coronary artery stenosis (50%-70%) as determined by quantitative coronary angiography. Patients were classified according to whether antiplatelet therapy was initiated after the index procedure. The primary efficacy outcome was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularization, and stroke, during a 5-year follow-up period. The primary safety outcome was any gastrointestinal bleeding.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After propensity score matching, there were 1634 patients in the antiplatelet therapy group and 1634 in the nonantiplatelet therapy group. The risk of MACCE was similar between the 2 groups (24.8% vs 24.7%; adjusted HR, 0.97; 95%CI, 0.84-1.13; P = 0.745). The risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was higher in the antiplatelet therapy group than in the nonantiplatelet therapy group (2.2% vs 1.2%; aHR, 2.07; 95%CI, 1.08-4.00). These results were similar in subgroup analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis who underwent deferred revascularization due to their FFR, antiplatelet therapy may increase the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding without reducing the risk of future ischemic events.</p>","PeriodicalId":38430,"journal":{"name":"Revista española de cardiología (English ed.)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy in patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis and deferred revascularization.\",\"authors\":\"David Hong, Seung Hun Lee, Jihye Heo, Doosup Shin, Juhee Cho, Eliseo Guallar, Hyun Sung Joh, Hyun Kuk Kim, Junho Ha, Ki Hong Choi, Taek Kyu Park, Jeong Hoon Yang, Young Bin Song, Joo-Yong Hahn, Seung-Hyuk Choi, Hyeon-Cheol Gwon, Danbee Kang, Joo Myung Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rec.2024.11.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction and objectives: </strong>This study investigated the safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy in patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis who underwent deferred revascularization due to their fractional flow reserve (FFR).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A nationwide cohort study was conducted using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. A total of 4657 patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis who underwent deferred revascularization due to their FFR were identified from 2013 to 2020. FFR was indicated in patients with no prior evidence of myocardial ischemia and intermediate coronary artery stenosis (50%-70%) as determined by quantitative coronary angiography. Patients were classified according to whether antiplatelet therapy was initiated after the index procedure. The primary efficacy outcome was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularization, and stroke, during a 5-year follow-up period. The primary safety outcome was any gastrointestinal bleeding.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After propensity score matching, there were 1634 patients in the antiplatelet therapy group and 1634 in the nonantiplatelet therapy group. The risk of MACCE was similar between the 2 groups (24.8% vs 24.7%; adjusted HR, 0.97; 95%CI, 0.84-1.13; P = 0.745). The risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was higher in the antiplatelet therapy group than in the nonantiplatelet therapy group (2.2% vs 1.2%; aHR, 2.07; 95%CI, 1.08-4.00). These results were similar in subgroup analyses.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis who underwent deferred revascularization due to their FFR, antiplatelet therapy may increase the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding without reducing the risk of future ischemic events.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38430,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista española de cardiología (English ed.)\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista española de cardiología (English ed.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rec.2024.11.001\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista española de cardiología (English ed.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rec.2024.11.001","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介和目的:本研究调查了因分数血流储备(FFR)而接受延期血管重建术的中度冠状动脉狭窄患者接受抗血小板治疗的安全性和有效性:利用韩国国民健康保险服务数据库开展了一项全国性队列研究。2013年至2020年间,共有4657名中度冠状动脉狭窄患者因FFR而接受了延期血管再通手术。FFR适用于既往无心肌缺血证据,且经定量冠状动脉造影确定为中度冠状动脉狭窄(50%-70%)的患者。根据患者是否在指数手术后开始抗血小板治疗进行分类。主要疗效指标是5年随访期间的主要心脑血管不良事件(MACCE),即全因死亡、心肌梗死、非计划性血管重建和中风的复合指标。主要的安全性结果是胃肠道出血:经过倾向评分匹配后,抗血小板治疗组和非抗血小板治疗组分别有 1634 名和 1634 名患者。两组患者发生 MACCE 的风险相似(24.8% vs 24.7%;调整后 HR,0.97;95%CI,0.84-1.13;P = 0.745)。抗血小板治疗组的胃肠道出血风险高于非抗血小板治疗组(2.2% vs 1.2%;aHR,2.07;95%CI,1.08-4.00)。这些结果在亚组分析中相似:结论:对于因FFR而接受延期血管重建的中度冠状动脉狭窄患者,抗血小板治疗可能会增加胃肠道出血的风险,而不会降低未来缺血性事件的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy in patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis and deferred revascularization.

Introduction and objectives: This study investigated the safety and efficacy of antiplatelet therapy in patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis who underwent deferred revascularization due to their fractional flow reserve (FFR).

Methods: A nationwide cohort study was conducted using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database. A total of 4657 patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis who underwent deferred revascularization due to their FFR were identified from 2013 to 2020. FFR was indicated in patients with no prior evidence of myocardial ischemia and intermediate coronary artery stenosis (50%-70%) as determined by quantitative coronary angiography. Patients were classified according to whether antiplatelet therapy was initiated after the index procedure. The primary efficacy outcome was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularization, and stroke, during a 5-year follow-up period. The primary safety outcome was any gastrointestinal bleeding.

Results: After propensity score matching, there were 1634 patients in the antiplatelet therapy group and 1634 in the nonantiplatelet therapy group. The risk of MACCE was similar between the 2 groups (24.8% vs 24.7%; adjusted HR, 0.97; 95%CI, 0.84-1.13; P = 0.745). The risk of gastrointestinal bleeding was higher in the antiplatelet therapy group than in the nonantiplatelet therapy group (2.2% vs 1.2%; aHR, 2.07; 95%CI, 1.08-4.00). These results were similar in subgroup analyses.

Conclusions: In patients with intermediate coronary artery stenosis who underwent deferred revascularization due to their FFR, antiplatelet therapy may increase the risk of gastrointestinal bleeding without reducing the risk of future ischemic events.

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
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
219
期刊最新文献
Incidence and chronology of atrioventricular block and outcomes after percutaneous septal ablation in hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. Interaction between age and therapeutic approach on outcome in older patients with patent foramen ovale-associated stroke. Catheter-directed interventions in acute pulmonary embolism. Position statement of SEC-Interventional Cardiology Association/SEC-Ischemic Heart Disease and Acute Cardiovascular Care Association/SEC-GT Pulmonary Hypertension Working Group. Outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention or bypass surgery for ischemic cardiomyopathy. Cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in chronic Chagas cardiomyopathy: the Rassi death risk score for decision-making.
×
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