药物洗脱支架在再狭窄高危患者的临床应用

目的 评估药物洗脱支架在再狭窄高危患者应用的初步结果。方法 19个月间对32例再狭窄高危患者行雷帕霉素药物洗脱冠状动脉支架Cypher(Cordis)和Firebird(Microport)置入术，男26例，女6例，年龄48～77岁，平均61．6岁。结果 在32例患者的34支血管37处病变置入37枚药物洗脱支架，Cypher9例，Firebird28例。随访1～19个月，平均6．3个月，无一例发生再狭窄或进行靶血管或靶病变血运重建。结论 药物洗脱冠状动脉支架置入即刻成功率高，对再狭窄高危患者的术后近期发生再狭窄率低。     

药物洗脱支架与支架内再狭窄

随着药物洗脱支架(Drug Eluting Stent, DES)的出现,再狭窄的问题得到进一步的有效控制,目前的临床证据表明DES总的再狭窄率已经在10%以下.但DES的支架内再狭窄ISR仍是临床介入治疗面临的重要问题.     

药物洗脱支架内再狭窄研究的进展

支架内再狭窄(ISR)仍是介入治疗的重点难题。目前ISR机制尚未明确,可能与支架内新生动脉粥样硬化(ISNA)相关,利用血管内超声和光学相干断层成像可进一步评价ISNA性质,从而指导治疗,本文就药物洗脱支架置入术后ISR形成的影响及治疗方面的最新进展作一综述。     

药物洗脱支架治疗支架内再狭窄

20世纪初,随着以Cypher(Cordis公司, Johnson & Johnson)和TAXUS为代表的药物洗脱支架应用于临床,在降低再狭窄发生率和改善冠心病介入治疗预后上取得了显著的进展,被誉为冠心病介入治疗史上的第三个里程碑[1,2],但是,药物洗脱支架在高危复杂病变中的疗效尚有待进一步证实.本研究旨在评价雷帕霉素药物洗脱支架(SES)在支架内再狭窄(ISR)治疗中的价值.     

药物洗脱支架治疗支架内再狭窄的对照研究

目的 比较3种药物洗脱支架(DES)治疗支架内再狭窄的长期临床效果.方法 回顾性分析阜外医院对支架内再狭窄病例用DES行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的390例患者,其中雷帕霉素药物洗脱支架(Cypher)组187例(C组),紫杉醇药物涂层支架(Taxus)组89例(T组),国产雷帕霉素涂层支架(Firebird)组114例(F组).结果 T组不稳定性心绞痛比率高于另2组,F组左主干病变比率低于另2组,而3支病变比率高于另2组.3组平均临床随访时间为864、848和719 d,主要不良心脏事件发生率差异无统计学意义(P=0.081),3组总的支架内血栓发生率差异无统计学意义(P=0.605).7个月造影随访支架内和血管段再狭窄率T组有增高的趋势(17.9%比29.4%比13.6%.P=0.214和21.8%比35.3%比15.9%,P=0.132).支架内和血管段的晚期丢失T组均明显大于另外2组[(0.31±0.12)mm比(0.75±0.24)mm比(0.31±0.13)mm,P=0.000和(0.33±0.18)mm比(0.61±0.23)mm比(0.31±0.14)mm,P=0.001].结论 3种DES治疗支架内再狭窄病变的长期疗效相似,Cypher和Firebird抑制内膜增生的作用更强.     

国人应用雷帕霉素药物洗脱支架预防再狭窄的初步经验--Sino-SIRIUS临床试验

目的　研究雷帕霉素药物洗脱支架对国人自身冠状动脉第一次进行介入治疗的病变减少再狭窄的效果及安全性。方法　本试验为在 2个中心进行的开放、前瞻性研究。入选标准包括对单一病变 (2 5mm≤靶病变直径≤ 3 0mm)进行治疗 ,长度≤ 30mm ,至少TIMI 1级血流。排除标准包括无保护的左主干病变、开口部病变、左室射血分数≤ 2 5 %、完全闭塞病变 (TIMI 0级 )以及分叉病变侧支直径≥ 2 5mm者。术后 1、3和 6个月进行临床随访 ,术后 6个月造影随访 ,核心试验室 (纽约心血管研究基金会 )进行QCA分析。结果　 4 1例患者入选本研究 ,其中男性 30例 (占 73 2 % ) ,平均年龄 (5 8 6± 11 0 )岁 ,合并糖尿病患者 12例 (占 2 9 3% )。基础冠状动脉造影示参考血管直径(2 5 8± 0 35 )mm ,最小管腔直径 (MLD) (0 77± 0 33)mm ,直径狭窄 (DS % )为 (6 9 77± 12 16 ) % ,病变长度 (14 2 7± 3 72 )mm。支架置入后 ,MLD支架内 (2 4 4± 0 2 8)mm ,节段内 (2 15± 0 38)mm ;DS %支架内 (8 5 8± 9 18) % ,节段内 (19 92± 9 99) %。 6个月造影随访 ,MLD支架内 (2 4 7±0 32 )mm ,节段内 (2 0 6± 0 38)mm ;DS %支架内 (6 6 9± 10 5 3) % ,节段内 (2 2 5 9± 10 2 1) % ;晚期管腔丧失支架内为 ( 0     

老年药物洗脱支架再狭窄及影响因素分析性

目的 调查冠心病经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)患者药物洗脱支架再狭窄(DES-ISR)现状及相关因素。方法 将2018年6月至2021年6月陆军军医大学第二附属医院收治的536例行PCI手术治疗的冠心病患者纳为研究对象,根据患者行PCI手术时的年龄,将其分为老年组(n=330)及青中年组(n=206)。术后随访6~12个月,统计不同年龄段PCI手术患者DES-ISR发生率,根据造影结果将患者分为ISR组及非ISR组,分别分析影响不同年龄段冠心病PCI手术患者DES-ISR的相关因素。采用SPSS 20.0软件进行数据分析。根据数据类型,组间比较分别采用t检验及χ²检验。结果 老年及中青年PCI患者术后DES-ISR发生率分别为18.18%(60/330)与15.53%(32/206),差异无统计学意义。老年PCI术后ISR组中合并糖尿病、合并分叉、钙化病变及弥漫狭窄病变、术后服药依从性差、支架断裂、支架扩张不足、术前Gensini评分、支架直径、支架长度、支架个数以及空腹血糖水平高于非ISR组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。中青年PCI术后ISR组中合并高血压、吸烟、饮酒者占比高于非ISR组,Gensini评分及低密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平均高于非ISR组,差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。结论 影响不同年龄段CHD患者PCI术后DES-ISR发生率的相关因素不尽相同,老年PCI术后DES-ISR发生风险主要与其冠状动脉病变严重程度及支架植入状况相关,而中青年PCI术后DES-ISR发生风险则主要与其术后不良生活习惯相关。     

药物洗脱球囊治疗支架内再狭窄的研究进展

正经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(percutaneous coronary intervention,PCI)经历了30年的发展历程,而减少术后再狭窄一直是人们努力的方向。单纯经皮冠状动脉腔内成形术(percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty,PTCA)再狭窄高达39%~67%[1],裸金属支架(bare-metal stent,BMS)置入术后再狭窄可达5%~35%[2],药物洗脱支架(drug-eluting stent,DES)置入术后再狭窄仍达5%~10%[3]。近些年来出现了预防介入治疗术后血管再狭窄的新技术—药物洗脱球囊     

同种和不同种药物洗脱支架治疗冠状动脉药物洗脱支架内再狭窄有效性的系统评价

目的评价同种药物洗脱支架和不同种药物洗脱支架治疗冠状动脉药物洗脱支架内再狭窄的有效性。方法计算机检索Pub Med、OVID、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、万方数据库、中国学术期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、维普数据库(VIP),收集同种和不同种药物洗脱支架治疗冠状动脉药物洗脱支架内再狭窄的临床资料,共纳入10项研究,1680名患者,使用Rev Man5.2软件进行系统评价。检索时间为各大数据库建库至2015年10月。结果在治疗冠状动脉药物洗脱支架内再狭窄时,采用不同药物洗脱支架可降低靶病变血运重建率(OR=0.73,95%CI为0.55~0.96,P=0.02)和主要不良心血管事件发生率(OR=0.72,95%CI为0.54~0.96,P=0.03)。两组间的病死率(OR=1.03,95%CI为0.49~2.16,P=0.95)和心肌梗死发生率(OR=0.59,95%CI为0.24~1.41,P=0.23)无统计学差异。结论对于药物洗脱支架内再狭窄患者,再次植入不同药物洗脱支架比植入同种支架更获益。     

药物洗脱支架时代的支架内再狭窄

近年来,随着冠心病发病率逐渐升高,介入治疗已成为重要的治疗手段。但是介入治疗并发的支架内再狭窄(ISR)使该技术受到极大的限制。再狭窄指PCI后冠脉造影显示血管内径再次狭窄达到或超过50%,伴或不伴临床症状、主要不良心血管事件(MACE)等[1]。在金属裸支架(BMS)时代,再狭窄     

Management of drug-eluting stent restenosis

In-stent restenosis has been a longstanding problem after percutaneous coronary intervention. The introduction of the drug-eluting stent (DES) successfully reduced the rate of restenosis; however, it is not completely diminished. Although restenosis occurs less frequently compared to the bare-metal stent (BMS), DES restenosis remains a familiar problem due to the increasing total number of implanted DESs as well as the targeting of more complex lesions. In addition, worse outcomes after repeat revascularization compared to BMS restenosis are reported in DES restenosis. Management of DES restenosis is an emerging issue, which requires careful evaluation of the restenosed lesion, together with cautious determination of therapeutic strategy. In this review, available repeat revascularization procedures for DES restenosis as well as possible impacting factors on the outcomes are discussed.     

How to approach drug-eluting stent restenosis

Drug-eluting stents (DES) have been a major advance in percutaneous coronary intervention reducing restenosis and repeat revascularization. The application of DES to the treatment of complex lesion and patient subsets has resulted in significant rates of DES restenosis or failure. Though predominantly focal, substantial rates of non-focal DES restenosis are being observed. Non-focal disease most likely represents a resistant process that will remain a therapeutic challenge. An understanding of the causative mechanical and biological factors is essential for the prevention and treatment of DES restenosis. Robust data relating to the treatment efficacy for this problem is lacking. At present, repeat DES or vascular brachytherapy appear to the best available options. Evidence from randomized controlled trials and large registries is required to establish a formal treatment approach. We provide guidelines based on current available evidence.     

药物洗脱支架置人术后断裂导致支架内再狭窄的临床分析

目的 探讨药物洗脱支架(DES)置入术后支架断裂与再狭窄的关系及支架断裂的特点.方法 回顾性分析冠状动脉支架置人术后行冠状动脉造影复查的536例患者,实验分为DES组(N=397)和裸金属支架(BMS)组(n=139).分析支架置入术前、术后及复查时的冠状动脉造影图像,找出支架内再狭窄和支架断裂的病例,分析支架断裂和再狭窄的关系以及支架断裂的病变特征及形态特征.结果 DES组和BMS组再狭窄分别为31例和30例(P＜0.01),其中5例发生支架断裂,断裂的支架均为DES,BMS组未见支架断裂,两组差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05).发生支架断裂的5例靶病变均为扭曲病变,支架断裂均发生在血管扭曲成角处.结论 支架断裂是DES置入术后发生再狭窄的原因之一,扭曲病变置入长的DES后可能容易发生支架断裂.     

In-stent restenosis in the drug-eluting stent era

The introduction of the drug-eluting stent (DES) proved to be an important step forward in reducing rates of restenosis and target lesion revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention. However, the rapid implementation of DES in standard practice and expansion of the indications for percutaneous coronary intervention to high-risk patients and complex lesions also introduced a new problem: DES in-stent restenosis (ISR), which occurs in 3% to 20% of patients, depending on patient and lesion characteristics and DES type. The clinical presentation of DES ISR is usually recurrent angina, but some patients present with acute coronary syndrome. Mechanisms of DES ISR can be biological, mechanical, and technical, and its pattern is predominantly focal. Intravascular imaging can assist in defining the mechanism and selecting treatment modalities. Based upon the current available evidence, an algorithm for the treatment approaches to DES restenosis is proposed.     

关于药物洗脱支架再狭窄研究的进展

支架内再狭窄是介入治疗技术中面临的重要医学难题,药物洗脱支架明显降低支架内再狭窄率,然而在抑制血管平滑肌细胞过度增殖的同时,也抑制了支架处内皮功能和生长,其内皮化延迟可导致晚期再狭窄及延迟血栓的形成。本文就药物洗脱支架再狭窄现状、影响因素、发生机制和各种治疗方法的研究进展做一综述。     

Vascular brachytherapy for patients with drug-eluting stent restenosis

Background: The rate of drug‐eluting stent (DES) in‐stent restenosis (ISR) exceeds 10% in complex subsets of patients and lesions. The optimal management of DES ISR remains undetermined. Vascular brachytherapy (VBT) is proven to be effective for the treatment of bare metal stent ISR but its outcome for DES ISR has not been established. Methods: Ninety‐nine consecutive patients who presented with ISR following DES implantation in 122 lesions were subjected to conventional percutaneous coronary intervention with adjunct VBT using either beta radiation (Beta Rail in 74 patients [82.2%] and the Galileo system in 13 patients [14.4%]) or gamma radiation (Checkmate system in 3 patients [3.3%]). Patients were followed clinically for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) during 1‐year follow‐up. Results: A high proportion of patients in this cohort presented with complex ISR; 31.1% had recurrences of ISR to the same site, 55% had diffuse or proliferate pattern of restenosis, and 23 lesions (18.9%) were located in a saphenous vein graft. Procedural success and uneventful in‐hospital course were documented in all patients post VBT. At 12 months' follow‐up, the target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate was 11% and the overall MACE rate was 26%. Patients with multiple episodes of ISR to the same site had a TLR of 16% and MACE rate of 35.5%. Conclusions: VBT for the treatment of DES ISR was found to be effective and safe and should be considered for the treatment of DES ISR, in particular in complex patients with multiple recurrences.     

New drug-eluting stents, optimizing technique, and the problem of drug-eluting stent restenosis

The development of drug-eluting stents is one of the major revolutions in the field of Interventional Cardiology. Restenosis rate has been significantly reduced, in comparison to bare metal stents. The ideal drug to prevent restenosis must have an anti-proliferative and anti-migratory effect on smooth muscle cells but on the other hand must also enhance re-endothelialization, in order to prevent late thrombosis. Additionally, it should effectively inhibit the anti-inflammatory response after balloon induced arterial injury. Currently sirolimus, paclitaxel and more recently, ABT-578-eluting stents are commercially available, but ongoing research and clinical trials will result in new stents coming to market with novel designs loaded with a variety of compounds. As drug-eluting stent implantation becomes more liberal leading to an extensive use of this technology, the problem of restenosis in drug-eluting stents will become more common. However, for the time being, little is known regarding optimal treatment of in-stent restenosis following drug-eluting stent implantation. Future research is mandatory to further clarify, whether these patients should be treated with the same drug-eluting stent, with a different drug-eluting stent or with increased doses.