雷帕霉素药物洗脱支架直接置入术治疗急性冠脉综合征的临床研究

目的评价直接置入雷帕霉素药物洗脱支架(CYPHERTM,codis)治疗急性冠脉综合征(ACS)罪犯病变的安全性、可行性.方法32例接受CYPHERTM支架直接置入的患者(直接支架组)和一般情况匹配的34例球囊扩张后行冠脉支架术的患者(常规支架组),比较两组的一般情况,冠脉造影及介入治疗即刻和临床随访结果.结果直接支架组和常规支架组的成功率分别为97%和100%,直接支架组1例支架无法通过病变,球囊预扩张后成功置入原支架.两组无一例发生介入治疗相关的的严重心脏事件.随访期间两组严重心脏不良事件发生率无明显统计学差异.结论CYPHERTM支架直接置入术治疗ACS罪犯病变安全可行,成功率高.     

Cox多元回归分析对比药物洗脱支架与单纯球囊扩张术在急性心肌梗死小血管罪犯病变中应用效果

目的 探讨急性,心肌梗死小血管罪犯病变的介入治疗中,与应用单纯球囊扩张术相比,药物洗脱支架的安全性与有效性.方法 共入选1364例罪犯血管为小血管病变(靶血管直径≤2.5 mm)的急性心肌梗死并接受成功经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的患者,根据治疗方案分为药物洗脱支架组(支架组,n=683)和单纯球囊扩张组(球囊扩张组,n=681),应用Cox多元回归分析对比两组患者随访8个月时的主要不良心脏事件的发生情况.结果 支架组与球囊扩张组相比,心源性病死率[优势比(OR)0.57,95%可信区间(CI)0.33～0.98,P=0.041]和总病死率(OR 0.60,95%CI 0.38～0.95,P=0.028)显著降低,其他主要不良心脏事件发生率两组间无统计学差异.结论 小血管病变急性心肌梗死患者即使靶血管已成功开通,植入药物洗脱支架也是必要的.     

冠状动脉介入治疗急性冠状动脉综合征疗效分析

目的评价冠状动脉介入治疗急性冠状动脉综合征 ( ACS)的疗效和安全性。方法对冠状动脉血管狭窄 >90 %及完全闭塞性病变 ,根据造影结果选择合适的球囊扩张和支架置入术。结果 42例 5 1个血管段的 PTCA及支架置入术。急性心肌梗死梗死相关血管单纯 PTCA7例 ,8个血管段病变狭窄 <90 %直接置入支架。 42例 ACS患者共置入 5 5个支架 ,支架置入成功率 10 0 % ,支架置入后管腔残余狭窄程度 ( 0± 10 ) % ,病变成功率为 96.1% ( 49/5 1处 )。 2例因引导钢丝未通过 C型病变而失败 ,无一例死亡、急性心肌梗死、紧急冠脉搭桥、心包填塞等严重并发症 ,术后主要并发症为穿刺部位出血。术后随访 1～ 12月 7例再发心绞痛 ,1例因再狭窄行冠状动脉旁路搭桥术治疗 ,无症状及经造影证实靶血管通畅率为 82 .5 % ( 33/4 0例 )。结论 ACS患者早期冠状动脉介入治疗 ,血管重建可降低冠心病事件 ,介入治疗安全、有效 ,值得推广     

老年急性冠脉综合征的介入治疗

目的　总结 17例老年急性冠脉综合征 (ACS)患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗 (PCI)的效果。方法　老年男性ACS患者 17例 ,持续胸痛伴 (或 )ST段抬高的患者急诊PCI(2例 ) ;非ST段抬高的AMI及UA患者规范内科治疗病情平稳 1周后行PCI。结果　对 2 1支罪犯血管进行PTCA后置入 2 5枚支架。除 4例近期病人 ,12例随访 4～ 16个月无心绞痛发作 ;1例术后 3个月冠脉造影显示支架内再狭窄 ,经切割球囊扩张后随访 5个月无心绞痛发作。结论　根据危险分层对老年ACS患者及时进行PCI可获得良好效果 ,临床安全程度高。成功的支架置入和围手术期的治疗管理是老年ACS患者PCI成功的重要保证。     

急性冠脉综合征的急诊介入疗效评价

目的　观察急性冠脉综合征 (acutecoronarysyndromes,ACS)急诊治疗的安全性及临床效果。方法　 77例ACS病人在心绞痛反复发作时即行冠状动脉造影 ,明确病变后对“罪犯”病变行急诊介入治疗。采用PTCA +支架和直接置入支架两种干预措施。从术后残余狭窄 <1 0 % ,前向血流TIMI3级为手术成功标准。结果　对“罪犯”病变PTCA后置入支架 78枚(其中因PTCA发生夹层置入 4枚 ) ,直接置入支架 2 6枚。术后残余狭窄均 <1 0 % ,前向血流TIMI 3级的 75例 ,TIMI 2级的 2例 ,手术成功率为 97 4% ;69例病人心绞痛消失 ,8例不典型胸痛者术后 72h内症状消失。无术中死亡及急诊冠脉旁路移植术 (CABG)病例。随访 63例病人 2～ 1 3个月 ,1 1例再发心绞痛 ,9例冠脉造影提示再狭窄 ,6例再次PTCA ,2例PTCA +支架 ,1例接受外科CABG后症状消失 ;无AMI、猝死及心功能恶化发生。结论　对ACS病人行急诊介入治疗是积极有效的治疗措施 ,手术成功率及安全性较高 ,近、远期临床效果较满意     

急性心肌梗死直接冠状动脉内支架置入的临床评价

目的　探讨急诊直接冠脉内支架置入术治疗ST段抬高型急性心肌梗死 (AMI)的价值。方法　ST段抬高型AMI患者 133例 ,分别行直接冠脉内支架置入术 (直接支架组 ,81例 )和球囊预扩张后支架置入术 (常规支架组 ,5 2例 )。对比两组患者的介入治疗、术后TIMI分级和心电图、出院前左室射血分数 (LVEF)和住院期间主要不良心脏事件发生率。结果　直接支架组和常规支架组基础临床特征、TIMI 3级和无复流均无统计学显著差异 (P >0 .0 5 )。直接支架组平均X线曝光时间和造影剂用量均显著低于常规支架组 (P <0 .0 5 ) ,而平均LVEF显著高于常规支架组 (P <0 .0 5 ) ,且ST段无回落的发生率和住院期间主要不良心脏事件发生率均显著降低 (P <0 .0 5 )。结论　对于ST段抬高型AMI中适当的冠状动脉病变 ,直接冠脉内支架置入术不仅可以减少X线曝光时间和造影剂用量 ,而且可能改善患者的心肌组织再灌注和近期预后。     

雷帕霉素药物涂层支架治疗分叉病变不同方法的对比

目的：比较主支内或主支与分支内同时置入雷帕霉素药物涂层支架(CYPHERTM，cordis)治疗冠状动脉分叉病变的临床疗效。方法：主要冠状动脉分叉病变31例，20例采用对吻球囊技术对主支和分支预扩张．仅主支内置入CYPHERTM支架。B组11例采用“T型”支架技术，分别在主支和分支置入CYPHERTM支架。临床随访3～6个月．观察主要不良心脏事件的发生。结果：两组患之间基础临床情况及冠脉造影血管特征差异无显性。A组主支成功率为100％，分支成功率90％(18／20)。B组支架成功率为100％。两组均无主要不良心脏事件发生。结论：主支或主支与分支内同时置入CYPHERTM支架治疗冠状动脉分叉病变同样安全有效。     

冠状动脉直接支架术与常规支架术的对比研究

目的:与球囊预扩张后置入支架的常规支架术相比较,分析冠状动脉直接支架术的可行性、安全性及其临床疗效.方法:选择389例行冠脉介入治疗并置入金属裸支架的患者,分为A、B两组进行比较分析,其中A组187例患者的214处病变施行了直接支架术.B组202例患者的276处病变施行了预扩张置入支架术.两组患者的临床及冠脉造影特征相似,将两组的介入治疗结果相比较.结果:A组187例患者中181例成功施行直接支架术,技术成功率96.8%:6例患者换为常规支架术而顺利置入支架,介入手术成功率100%.两组患者支架置入成功率无差异,A组手术操作时间较短、球囊导管用量较少(P<0.01)、X线暴光时间较短、造影剂用量较少、手术费用较低(P<0.05).A、B两组分别有3例(1.6%)和17例(8.4%)术中发生血管撕裂夹层(P<0.05).术后12～36个月随访显示,A组有10例患者(5.3%)心绞痛复发,9例患者经心电图活动平板试验证实有心肌缺血复发,这19例复发患者经CAG复查示14例(7.5%)为支架内再狭窄:B组有26例患者(12.9%)心绞痛复发,6例患者活动平板试验心肌缺血复发,复查CAG显示其中20例(9.9%)为支架内再狭窄.临床随访期内A组心绞痛复发率低于B组(P<0.05).结论:直接支架术是一种安全、有效、易行的冠脉介入治疗技术,其术中血管并发征及术后心绞痛发生率较低.     

血管内超声指导急性冠状动脉综合征患者药物洗脱支架置入的研究

目的探讨血管内超声（IVUS）指导药物洗脱支架置入的价值。方法对38例急性冠状动脉综合征患者67处病变行IVUS检查，指导药物洗脱支架置入。置入后再行IVUS，对未达到理想释放者进行高压球囊后扩张。观察6个月主要不良心脏事件。结果首次常规高压扩张置入支架，67处病变均达到冠状动脉造影理想标准，但符合IVUS理想标准仅40处（59．7％），27处（40．3％）未达标；行高压球囊后扩张，又有21处达到IVUS理想标准。最终达到IVUS理想标准者与常规高压扩张后比较，差异有统计学意义（91．0％对59．7％，P〈0．0001）。随访期间无一例心源性死亡或再梗死，再发心绞痛2例（5．3%）。结论常规高压球囊扩张置入药物洗脱支架，并不能使所有支架达到IVUS理想标准。IVUS指导下高压球囊后扩张可进一步改善药物洗脱支架置入效果，具有重要临床价值。     

小支架在急性冠脉综合征中的应用

目的　探讨小支架 (直径 <3mm)用于急性冠脉综合征 (ACS)介入治疗中的近期效果。方法　在急诊的情况下 ,采用常规的冠脉介入治疗方法 ,对 4 6处犯罪血管病变进行了支架植入 ,根据使用支架的大小分为大支架组 (n =2 8,直径≥3mm)和小支架组 (n =18,直径 <3mm)。观察两组病人术后住院期间的无事件发生率、再心绞痛、再心肌梗死、急诊搭桥术和急诊介入治疗、严重心律失常、心功能不全、心源性休克和死亡等心脏事件发生率。结果　两组住院期间的无心脏事件发生率无明显差异 ,两组间均无再发AMI、急诊介入治疗、亚急性血栓和心功能不全的发生。大支架组有 1例在犯罪血管支架植入后 2h发生持续室性心动过速 ,经电转复后行急诊冠脉搭桥术。 2例AMI合并心源性休克 ,在介入治疗血管再通后仍不能控制病情 ,分别在术后 3h和 5h死亡。 1例急诊术后 1h再发心绞痛经药物治疗后完全缓解 ,以上 4例均为 3支病变。小支架组仅在 1例术后拔鞘管时迷走神经兴奋引发心绞痛 ,经药物治疗缓解。结论　与大支架组相比并未见到小支架植入后增加了近期心脏事件发生率 ,均获得了较好的近期效果。     

直接支架术与预扩张支架术治疗冠心病的Meta分析

目的系统评价冠脉内直接支架术和需球囊的预扩张支架术两种介入方法的安全及有效性。方法采用Cochrane系统评价方法,计算机检索PubMed、EMbase、Cochrane Library(2011年第3期)、CBMdisc、VIP、CNKI,检索时间从建库截至2011年4月,纳入中外文关于冠脉内直接支架术和球囊预扩张后支架术的RCT。由两名评价者独立评价纳入研究质量、提取资料并交叉核对后,采用RevMan 5.0软件进行Meta分析。结果共纳入24个RCT,6 666例患者。结果显示:与预扩张支架术相比,直接支架术手术时间短[MD=–3.36,95%CI(–4.41,–2.30),P<0.000 01],但在手术过程中急性管腔获得[MD=–0.01,95%CI(–0.04,0.02),P=0.64]、随访6个月时的主要心脏不良事件率[OR=0.89,95%CI(0.69,1.14),P=0.35]、再狭窄率[OR=1.02,95%CI(0.82,1.26),P=0.88]方面,两组差异无统计学意义。结论当前证据表明,直接支架术并不优于预扩张支架术。今后的临床研究仍需开展大规模设计良好的随机对照试验和尽可延长随访时间。     

阿托品在颈动脉支架置入术中的预防性应用

目的:观察阿托品对颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)的颈动脉窦反应的预防作用。方法:行CAS治疗的患者60例,随机分为对照组和阿托品组各30例,阿托品组常规预扩前静脉注射阿托品1 mg,对照组预扩前注射等量生理盐水。观察2组病例球囊扩张及支架植入过程与术后的颈动脉窦反应情况。结果:阿托品组颈动脉窦反应3例(10.0%),对照组颈动脉窦反应11例(36.7%),差异有统计学意义(χ2=5.963,P=0.015)。结论:在CAS中预防性应用阿托品可减少颈动脉窦反应发生率。     

Outcomes of endovascular occlusion and stenting in the treatment of carotid blowout

Background and purpose

Carotid blowout is a life threatening complication of invasive head and neck cancers and their treatments. This is commonly treated with endovascular embolization and carotid stenting. Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, we report the immediate clinical results of patients receiving embolization and/or stenting for treatment of carotid blowout associated with head and neck cancer.

Materials and methods

Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from the period 2003–2011, we defined carotid blowout patients as those with head and neck malignancies receiving carotid stenting and/or endovascular embolization without open surgery. Outcomes studied included mortality, acute ischemic stroke, hemiplegia/paresis, and other post-operative neurologic complications. Outcomes for the endovascular embolization and carotid stenting group were compared.

Results

A total of 1218 patients underwent endovascular treatment for carotid blowout. Of these, 1080 patients (88.6%) underwent embolization procedures and 138 patients (11.4%) underwent carotid stenting. The mortality rate of endovascular embolization patients was similar to that of carotid stenting patients (8.0%, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 6.5%–9.7% versus 10.2%, 95% CI=6.0%–16.4%, p = 0.36). Stroke rate was similar between embolization patients and stenting patients (2.3%, 95% CI=1.6%–3.4% vs. 3.4%, 95% CI=1.3%–8.4%, p = 0.43). Hemiplegia rates were significantly higher rate in stenting patients compared with endovascular occlusion patients (3.8%, 95% CI=1.3%–8.4% vs. 1.4%, 95% CI=1.4%–2.4%, p = 0.05). The rate of post-operative neurologic complications was higher in stenting patients compared with embolization patients (6.5%, 95% CI=3.3%–12.1% vs. 1.4%, 95% CI=0.9%–2.4%, p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

Given the natural history of carotid blowout, carotid stenting and endovascular embolization are acceptable means of treating this disease. Endovascular embolization remains the most common treatment among patients with head and neck cancers with lower overall rates of post-operative neurologic complications, including hemiplegia/paresis and stroke.     

健康教育对冠状动脉内支架置入术后服氯吡格雷遵医率的影响

目的探讨健康教育能否提高患者冠状动脉内支架置入术后服氯吡格雷的遵医率。方法将110例冠脉支架术后的患者随机分为实验组(55例)和对照组(55例)。出院时,均嘱2组患者必须坚持服氯吡格雷9个月,只对实验组开展健康教育,然后评定两组患者的遵医行为。结果实验组患者的完全遵医率与总遵医率较对照组高(P<0.05),不遵医率较对照组低(P<0.05)。结论健康教育能提高患者冠状动脉内支架置入术后服氯吡格雷的遵医率。     

Effect of percutaneous interventions within the coronary sinus on the success rate of the implantations of resynchronization pacemakers

BACKGROUND: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) becomes a "gold standard" in therapy of selected patients with advanced heart failure. We set out to evaluate the feasibility and safety of percutaneous interventions within coronary sinus (CS) and their effect on the success rate of left ventricular (LV) lead implantation during CRT. METHODS: The study analyzed eight consecutive patients with the indications for CRT, who needed additional procedures within CS to overcome technical problems during left ventricular (LV) electrode implantation. The analyzed group consisted of three subgroups: patients in whom percutaneous balloon angioplasty within CS was needed (n = 4); patients with acute instability of the lead, requiring stenting of the vein to fix the electrode (n = 2); and patients with the stenting of CS due to late dislocation of the lead (n = 2). Success rate, procedure duration, fluoroscopy, complications, and electrical parameters of leads were analyzed. RESULTS: Success rate of the procedures was 87.5%; additional interventions increased overall efficacy of CRT implantation at our center from 88% to 98% (P < 0.05). Procedure duration (155.0 minute) and fluoroscopy time (42.5 minute) remained acceptable for the patient and operator; however, both were higher than in the procedures performed routinely in our hospital. Electrical properties of the LV leads were stable and within normal ranges during the observation period. We noted two local dissections of CS during the procedure, which remained clinically silent. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous interventions within CS seem to be feasible and safe treatment options, which can improve the short- and long-term success rates of CRT.     

冠脉内支架术治疗冠心病80例临床结果分析

目的分析冠脉内支架术治疗冠心病近、中期疗效及安全性。方法回顾性分析80例冠脉内支架术资料，观察冠脉内支架术的成功率、再狭窄率及主要心脏不良事件（MACE，包括死亡、非致死性心肌梗死和靶病变重建（TLR）术）。结果92处病变植入支架129枚，国产雷帕霉素药物洗脱支架（SES）组89枚，裸金属支架（BMS）组40枚。手术成功率97．5％，2例死亡。两组再狭窄发生率差异具有统计学意义（3．08％vs39．29％，P〈0．01）。两组TLR率差异具有统计学意义（1．54％粥29．63％，P〈0．01）。MACE发生率13．75％。结论冠脉内支架治疗冠心病安全有效，SES较BMS再狭窄率及TRL率近、中期均显著降低。     

宫腔镜下宫腔粘连分离术的不同辅助治疗方案对中重度宫腔粘连患者的临床疗效比较

目的 比较宫腔镜下宫腔粘连分离术（TCRA）的不同辅助治疗方案对中重度宫腔粘连患者的临床疗效。方法 收集98 例中重度宫腔粘连住院患者的临床资料。所有患者均行宫腔镜下TCRA,按患者的辅助治疗方案分为3组：TCRA组（A组,17例）、TCRA +子宫球囊支架置入术组（B组,35例）和TCRA +子宫球囊支架置入术+透明...     

几类恶性血液病病人杀伤免疫球蛋白样受体基因型的表达在高危及标危组的差异分析

本研究探讨几类高危和标危恶性血液病患者杀伤免疫球蛋白样受体（KIR）基因表达的异同。54例恶性血液病患者分为高危组（27例）和低危组（27例），其中急性髓系白血病14例、急性淋巴细胞白血病16例、慢性髓系白血病20例、骨髓增生异常综合征3例、急性混合白血病1例。用序列特异性引物PCR分型技术检测了6个激活性KIR基因（KIR2DS1-S5、3DS1）和6个抑制性KIR基因（KIR2DL1-2DL4、3DL1-3DL2）的表达，其中24例患者用流式细胞仪测定了NK细胞、T细胞表面CD158a（KIR2DL1、2DS1）、CD158b（KIR2DL2、2DL3、2DS2、2DS3）、CD158e（KIR3DL1、3DS1）的表达。结果显示，标危组病人激活性KIR基因的阳性率均高于高危组患者，2DS1（P=0.014）、2DS2（P=0.046）、3DS1（P=0．005）的差异有统计学意义；抑制性KIR基因的表达在两组患者之间的差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。在髓系恶性血液病病人中标危组病人KIR激活性基因表达率仍然高于高危组患者，其中2DS1（66.7％vs29.4％．P=0.022）、2DS2（57.6％vs17.6％，P=0.013）和2DS3（33.3％vs5.9％。p=0．039）。高危组患者同时表达两种以上激活性KIR基因的比例显著低于标危组（P=0.035）。高危和标危组患者NK细胞和T细胞表面CD158a、CD158b、CD158e的表达差异无统计学意义（P〉0．05）。结论：几类恶性血液病患者激活性KIR基因表达在高危和标危之间存在差异。     

Randomized comparison of early inflammatory response after sirolimus-eluting stent vs bare metal stent implantation in native coronary lesions

BACKGROUND: The clinical significance of early inflammatory response after coronary stent implantation has been controversial. Sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) has been shown to be better outcomes compared with bare metal stent (BMS). We prospectively investigated the early inflammatory response after SES or BMS implantation in patients with single-vessel lesion, and evaluated the relationship between inflammation and late clinical outcomes in a randomized design. METHODS: Forty-eight patients with single-vessel disease were randomized into SES or BMS implantation group (n=24 respectively). Blood samples were taken before stenting, 1 h, 24 h and 8 months afterward. The plasma concentrations of C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) were determined by ELISA. The clinical and angiographic follow-up were performed at 8 months after stenting. RESULTS: There was no difference in baseline characteristics, plasma CRP and IL-6 concentrations between the 2 groups. However, plasma IL-6 concentrations at 1 h after stenting were higher in both groups than in baseline (p<0.01). In addition, the plasma CRP and IL-6 concentrations at 24 h after stenting were significantly higher in both groups compared with baseline (p<0.01 respectively). Likewise, plasma CRP and IL-6 concentrations were significantly higher in BMS group compared with SES group at 24 h after stenting (p<0.05 respectively). At the follow-up (mean 8 months after stenting), the rate of in-stent restenosis (ISR) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) were higher in BMS group than in SES group (p<0.05 respectively) although the plasma CRP and IL-6 concentrations are similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Single coronary stenting could trigger an early inflammatory response. However, patients undergoing SES implantation has less augmentation of early inflammatory markers after stenting compared to patients treated with BMS, which was positively related the incidence of ISR and TLR at follow-up. This may reflect the potential impact of SES implantation on the early inflammatory response and late clinical outcomes.