Renato Roese Filho, Alan Castro D’Avila, Márcia Moura Schmidt, Alexandre Schaan de Quadros, Cristiano de Oliveira Cardoso, André Luiz Langer Manica, Alexandre Damiani Azmus, Júlio Vinicius de Souza Teixeira, Claudio Vasques de Moraes, Henrique Basso Gomes, Carlos Antônio Mascia Gottschall, Rogério Sarmento-Leite
{"title":"既往冠状动脉搭桥手术对经皮冠状动脉介入治疗患者预后的影响","authors":"Renato Roese Filho, Alan Castro D’Avila, Márcia Moura Schmidt, Alexandre Schaan de Quadros, Cristiano de Oliveira Cardoso, André Luiz Langer Manica, Alexandre Damiani Azmus, Júlio Vinicius de Souza Teixeira, Claudio Vasques de Moraes, Henrique Basso Gomes, Carlos Antônio Mascia Gottschall, Rogério Sarmento-Leite","doi":"10.1016/j.rbciev.2015.12.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Historically, patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have a worse prognosis than patients without prior CABG. However, more contemporary analyses have contested these findings. This study's aim was to evaluate the 30-day clinical outcomes in patients with and without prior CABG submitted to primary PCI.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Prospective cohort study, extracted from the database of Instituto de Cardiologia do Rio Grande do Sul, containing 1,854 patients undergoing primary PCI.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Patients with prior CABG (3.8%) showed, in general, a more severe clinical profile. The time of symptom onset until arrival at the hospital was shorter in this group (2.50<!--> <!-->hours [1.46 to 3.66] vs. 3.99<!--> <!-->hours [1.99 to 6.50]; <em>p</em> <em><</em> <!-->0.001), while the door-to-balloon time was similar (1.33 hour [0.85 to 2.07] vs. 1.16 hour [0.88 to 1.58]; <em>p</em> <em>=</em> <!-->0.12). Femoral access was more often used in the group with prior CABG (91.5% vs. 62.5%; <em>p</em> <em><</em> <!-->0.001). Manual thrombus aspiration was less often performed in this group (16.9% vs. 31.1%; <em>p</em> <em>=</em> <!-->0.007), but there was no difference regarding the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (28.2% vs. 32.4%, <em>p</em> <em>=</em> <!-->0.28). Angiographic success was lower in the group with prior CABG (80.3% vs. 93.3%; <em>p</em> <em>=</em> <!-->0.009). At 30 days, patients with prior CABG had similar rates of major adverse cardiac events (14.1% vs. 11.2%; <em>p</em> <em>=</em> <!-->0.28), and mortality, although numerically higher, was not statistically significant (13.2% vs. 7.0%, <em>p</em> <em>=</em> <!-->0.07).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In this contemporary analysis, patients with prior CABG undergoing primary PCI had a more severe clinical profile and lower angiographic success, but showed no differences regarding 30-day clinical outcomes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101094,"journal":{"name":"Revista Brasileira de Cardiologia Invasiva (English Edition)","volume":"23 2","pages":"Pages 102-107"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rbciev.2015.12.007","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of prior coronary bypass graft surgery on the outcomes of patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention\",\"authors\":\"Renato Roese Filho, Alan Castro D’Avila, Márcia Moura Schmidt, Alexandre Schaan de Quadros, Cristiano de Oliveira Cardoso, André Luiz Langer Manica, Alexandre Damiani Azmus, Júlio Vinicius de Souza Teixeira, Claudio Vasques de Moraes, Henrique Basso Gomes, Carlos Antônio Mascia Gottschall, Rogério Sarmento-Leite\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.rbciev.2015.12.007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Historically, patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have a worse prognosis than patients without prior CABG. However, more contemporary analyses have contested these findings. This study's aim was to evaluate the 30-day clinical outcomes in patients with and without prior CABG submitted to primary PCI.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Prospective cohort study, extracted from the database of Instituto de Cardiologia do Rio Grande do Sul, containing 1,854 patients undergoing primary PCI.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Patients with prior CABG (3.8%) showed, in general, a more severe clinical profile. The time of symptom onset until arrival at the hospital was shorter in this group (2.50<!--> <!-->hours [1.46 to 3.66] vs. 3.99<!--> <!-->hours [1.99 to 6.50]; <em>p</em> <em><</em> <!-->0.001), while the door-to-balloon time was similar (1.33 hour [0.85 to 2.07] vs. 1.16 hour [0.88 to 1.58]; <em>p</em> <em>=</em> <!-->0.12). Femoral access was more often used in the group with prior CABG (91.5% vs. 62.5%; <em>p</em> <em><</em> <!-->0.001). Manual thrombus aspiration was less often performed in this group (16.9% vs. 31.1%; <em>p</em> <em>=</em> <!-->0.007), but there was no difference regarding the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (28.2% vs. 32.4%, <em>p</em> <em>=</em> <!-->0.28). Angiographic success was lower in the group with prior CABG (80.3% vs. 93.3%; <em>p</em> <em>=</em> <!-->0.009). At 30 days, patients with prior CABG had similar rates of major adverse cardiac events (14.1% vs. 11.2%; <em>p</em> <em>=</em> <!-->0.28), and mortality, although numerically higher, was not statistically significant (13.2% vs. 7.0%, <em>p</em> <em>=</em> <!-->0.07).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>In this contemporary analysis, patients with prior CABG undergoing primary PCI had a more severe clinical profile and lower angiographic success, but showed no differences regarding 30-day clinical outcomes.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101094,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Brasileira de Cardiologia Invasiva (English Edition)\",\"volume\":\"23 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 102-107\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rbciev.2015.12.007\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Brasileira de Cardiologia Invasiva (English Edition)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214123515000332\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Brasileira de Cardiologia Invasiva (English Edition)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214123515000332","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
从历史上看,有冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的患者接受首次经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的预后比没有CABG的患者差。然而,更现代的分析对这些发现提出了质疑。本研究的目的是评估有或没有CABG的患者接受首次PCI治疗后30天的临床结果。方法前瞻性队列研究,从南里奥格兰德州心脏病研究所数据库中提取,包含1854例接受初级PCI治疗的患者。结果既往冠脉搭桥患者(3.8%)表现出更为严重的临床症状。该组患者出现症状至到达医院的时间较短(2.50小时[1.46 ~ 3.66]vs. 3.99小时[1.99 ~ 6.50];p & lt;0.001),而门到球囊的时间相似(1.33小时[0.85至2.07]vs. 1.16小时[0.88至1.58];p = 0.12)。先前CABG组更常使用股骨通路(91.5% vs. 62.5%;p & lt;0.001)。本组手工抽吸血栓的次数较少(16.9% vs. 31.1%;p = 0.007),但糖蛋白IIb/IIIa抑制剂的使用没有差异(28.2% vs. 32.4%, p = 0.28)。既往冠脉搭桥组的血管造影成功率较低(80.3% vs. 93.3%;p = 0.009)。30天时,既往冠脉搭桥患者的主要不良心脏事件发生率相似(14.1% vs 11.2%;P = 0.28),死亡率虽然数值较高,但无统计学意义(13.2%比7.0%,P = 0.07)。结论:在这项当代分析中,既往CABG患者接受首次PCI有更严重的临床特征和更低的血管造影成功率,但在30天的临床结果方面没有差异。
Impact of prior coronary bypass graft surgery on the outcomes of patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention
Background
Historically, patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have a worse prognosis than patients without prior CABG. However, more contemporary analyses have contested these findings. This study's aim was to evaluate the 30-day clinical outcomes in patients with and without prior CABG submitted to primary PCI.
Methods
Prospective cohort study, extracted from the database of Instituto de Cardiologia do Rio Grande do Sul, containing 1,854 patients undergoing primary PCI.
Results
Patients with prior CABG (3.8%) showed, in general, a more severe clinical profile. The time of symptom onset until arrival at the hospital was shorter in this group (2.50 hours [1.46 to 3.66] vs. 3.99 hours [1.99 to 6.50]; p< 0.001), while the door-to-balloon time was similar (1.33 hour [0.85 to 2.07] vs. 1.16 hour [0.88 to 1.58]; p= 0.12). Femoral access was more often used in the group with prior CABG (91.5% vs. 62.5%; p< 0.001). Manual thrombus aspiration was less often performed in this group (16.9% vs. 31.1%; p= 0.007), but there was no difference regarding the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (28.2% vs. 32.4%, p= 0.28). Angiographic success was lower in the group with prior CABG (80.3% vs. 93.3%; p= 0.009). At 30 days, patients with prior CABG had similar rates of major adverse cardiac events (14.1% vs. 11.2%; p= 0.28), and mortality, although numerically higher, was not statistically significant (13.2% vs. 7.0%, p= 0.07).
Conclusions
In this contemporary analysis, patients with prior CABG undergoing primary PCI had a more severe clinical profile and lower angiographic success, but showed no differences regarding 30-day clinical outcomes.