多支血管病变的功能性血运重建

<正>传统认为,冠状动脉多支血管病变的不完全血运重建(incomplete revascularization,IR)增加死亡、心肌梗死、心绞痛和再次血运重建的风险,解剖学上的完全血运重建(complete revascularization,CR)则能够改善长期的临床预后,从而成为心脏介入治疗追求的主要目标。然而,一项外科的注册研究发现,     

Benefit of revascularization in non-infarct-related artery in multivessel disease patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention

This study compared the prognosis of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in patients with multivessel disease (MVD) with that of single vessel disease (SVD) and investigated the revascularization benefit of noninfarct-related artery (IRA) in MVD patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Between 2002 and 2009, 1278 patients with STEMI underwent primary PCI. Of these patients, 717 (56.1%) with SVD (only IRA obstruction) were placed in group A, while 561 (43.9%) with MVD (Group B) were further categorized into group 1 (PCI for IRA) and group 2 (staged PCI for IRA+non-IRA). The results demonstrated a lower degree of successful reperfusion in IRA and higher 30-day and 1-year cumulative mortality rates in group B (P < 0.001). While there was no difference in successful reperfusion in IRA between group 1 and group 2, the 30-day and one-year cumulative mortality rates were higher in group 1. Multivariate analysis identified MVD as an independent predictor of 1-year mortality (P < 0.001). In conclusion, patients with subsequent PCI for MVD had better 30-day and 1-year outcomes than those with conservative treatment.     

Early angio-guided complete revascularization versus culprit vessel PCI followed by ischemia-guided staged PCI in STEMI patients with multivessel disease

Background: Optimal management of multivessel disease (MVD) in ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients treated by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is still unclear. Objectives: To compare short‐ and long‐term clinical outcomes of early‐staged, angio‐guided approach and delayed, ischemia‐guided treatment of non‐infarct‐related arteries (IRAs). Methods: Consecutive patients with STEMI and MVD treated with primary PCI in 6 tertiary care centers were retrospectively selected and analyzed. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were defined as the composite end‐point of death, MI, and repeat revascularization. All the events were adjudicated according to the Academic Research Consortium (ARC) definitions. Results: In the time period 2004–2008, 800 primary PCIs in STEMI patients with MVD were performed. Four hundred and seventeen were addressed to early‐staged, angio‐guided PCI of non‐IRAs (CR group) and 383 to an incomplete revascularization (IncR group). During the hospital stay, no difference in terms of death and repeat revascularization was found between groups but the incidence of periprocedural MI/reinfarction and MACE was significantly higher in the CR group (13.9% vs. 3.1%, P = 0.01 and 14.1% vs. 9.1%, P = 0.017, respectively). At a mean follow‐up of 642 ± 545 days, no difference in terms of death and MI was found between the CR and IncR group. The MACE‐free survival was significantly higher in the IncR group (73.8% vs. 57%, log rank 0.05), mainly driven by the lower incidence of re‐PCI. Conclusions: Early complete revascularization based only on angiographic findings in patients with STEMI and MVD is associated with an excess of periprocedural/re‐MI and with a significantly higher incidence of MACE at follow‐up. (J Interven Cardiol 2011;24:535–541)     

Off-pump myocardial revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary disease]

BACKGROUND: Some criticisms have been addressed to off-pump coronary surgery technique concerning the possibility of its systematic use with the respect of the completeness of revascularization. We report our experience with off-pump revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary disease. METHODS: Between September 1997 and April 2003, 868 patients with multivessel coronary disease were scheduled for off-pump surgical revascularization. From September 2000, the percentage of patients operated on without cardiopulmonary bypass has been stably > 90%. Fifteen patients (1.7%) had a conversion to cardiopulmonary bypass for anatomical reasons (n = 6) or clinical instability (n = 9). RESULTS: An average of 2.5 +/- 0.8 (range 1-5) anastomoses per patient were completed. Bilateral mammary artery was used in 573 patients (66%); totally arterial revascularization was accomplished in 479 patients (55.2%). In-hospital mortality rate was 0.6% (5 patients). Total incidence of non-fatal postoperative complications (bleeding requiring re-exploration, perioperative myocardial infarction, stroke, new onset of acute renal failure) was 3.5%. Mean postoperative hospital stay was 4.8 +/- 3.8 days. At a mean follow-up of 21.6 +/- 15.6 months (range 1-65 months), the postoperative actuarial survival rates were 97.3, 93.7 and 86.7% at 1, 3 and 5 years postoperatively. Actuarial freedom rates from new revascularization were 98.7, 96.6 and 96.6% at 1, 3 and 5 years postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Early- and intermediate-term results of this study demonstrate the feasibility of off-pump revascularization in all patients with multivessel coronary disease, respecting the criterion of complete myocardial revascularization.     

Meta-analysis of multivessel coronary artery revascularization versus culprit-only revascularization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease

American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines for management of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) recommend culprit artery-only revascularization (CULPRIT) based on safety concerns during noninfarct-related artery intervention. However, the data to support this safety concern are scant. Searches were performed in PubMed/EMBASE/CENTRAL for studies evaluating multivessel revascularization versus CULPRIT in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease (MVD). A multivessel revascularization strategy had to be performed at the time of CULPRIT or during the same hospitalization. Early (≤30-day) and long-term outcomes were evaluated. Among 19 studies (23 arms) that evaluated 61,764 subjects with STEMI and MVD, multivessel revascularization was performed in a minority of patients (16%). For early outcomes, there was no significant difference for outcomes of mortality, MI, stroke, and target vessel revascularization, with a 44% decrease in risk of repeat percutaneous coronary intervention and major adverse cardiovascular events (odds ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.81) with multivessel revascularization compared to CULPRIT. Similarly, for long-term outcomes (follow-up 2.0 ± 1.1 years), there was no difference for outcomes of MI, target vessel revascularization, and stent thrombosis, with 33%, 43%, and 53% decreases in risk of mortality, repeat percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, respectively, and major adverse cardiovascular events (odds ratio 0.60, 95% confidence interval 0.50 to 0.72) with multivessel revascularization compared to CULPRIT. In conclusion, in patients with STEMI and MVD, multivessel revascularization appears to be safe compared to culprit artery-only revascularization. These findings support the need for a large-scale randomized trial to evaluate revascularization strategies in patients with STEMI and MVD.     

糖尿病并发多支冠状动脉病变患者血管重建两种主要术式比较

目的:比较临床实践中血管重建术式对糖尿病并多支冠状动脉病变患者临床结果的影响。方法:2006年6月~2010年3月,确诊为糖尿病并发多支冠脉病变的冠心病患者226例,非随机行冠状动脉介入治疗（支架术,PCI)和冠脉搭桥术(CABG)对照研究。分析患者随访1年的临床结果。结果:CABG组和PCI组分别入选患者为105例和121例。比较CABG组与PCI组患者的年龄［(63±6)岁 vs.(68±7)岁,P<0.05］和高血压病史(97.1% vs. 89.3%,P<0.05)均有显著性差异,其他的临床特性均无显著性差异。随访1年的临床结果显示,CABG组与PCI组比较再次血管重建（TVR）(1.0% vs. 18.2%,P<0.01)和主要心脑血管事件（MACCE）(14.3% vs. 28.1%,P<0.01)均有显著性差异;而比较非致死性心肌梗死,卒中和死亡则无显著性差异。结论:糖尿病并多支病冠脉变的冠心病患者血管重建时CABG优于PCI。     

The adequacy of myocardial revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease

In patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD) myocardial revascularization may be accomplished either on all diseased lesions – complete myocardial revascularization – or on selectively targeted coronary segments by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Complete revascularization has a potential long-term prognostic benefit, but is more complex and may increase in-hospital events when compared with incomplete revascularization.     

Myocardial revascularization with and without cardiopulmonary bypass in multivessel disease patients.

BACKGROUND: Off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery is widely performed because of its proved safety, but its effectiveness remains controversial. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare early and late results in patients with multivessel disease, operated on off-pump and on-pump. METHODS: From November 1994 to December 2001, 2957 patients with multivessel disease underwent isolated coronary revascularization, on-pump (n = 1924) and off-pump (n = 1033). Sixty-five patients (2.2%) who were converted from off-pump to on-pump were considered as part of the off-pump group. RESULTS: Stepwise logistic regression analysis showed that the use of cardiopulmonary bypass was an independent predictor for early death, early negative primary endpoints, and early major events. Conversion to on-pump was an independent risk factor for a higher incidence of death due to any cause and cardiac death, early negative primary endpoints, and early major events. Conversion, however, did not affect late clinical outcome. The 6-year freedom from death (any cause, cardiac cause), myocardial infarction, redo/coronary angioplasty and any events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that off-pump surgery reduces early mortality and morbidity. These benefits are not at the expense of the long-term clinical outcome which seems to be similar in the two groups. Patients who require conversion from off-pump to on-pump have a much higher mortality and morbidity although this does not seem to influence their long-term clinical outcome.     

一次与分次经皮冠状动脉介入术完全血运重建对非ST段抬高型心肌梗死多支血管病变患者预后的影响

目的探讨一次经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)完全血运重建对非ST段抬高型心肌梗死(NSTEMI)多支血管病变患者短期预后的影响。方法本研究为回顾性研究。选择2016年1月至2017年1月在陕西省第四人民医院住院治疗的NSTEMI多支血管病变患者为研究对象,根据介入性完全血运重建治疗策略的不同分为一次PCI组(60例)和分次PCI组(98例),比较两组围术期资料和主要并发症;术后随访12个月,比较两组心功能改善情况和主要不良心血管事件发生率。结果两组的年龄、性别、合并症、心功能和心肌酶等基线资料无明显差异(均为P>0.05)。此外,两组患者双支病变比例和人均支架置入数量均相似(均为P>0.05),但一次PCI组患者平均病变血管数量(2.2±0.6比2.8±0.5)、住院时间[(5.0±3.5)d比(11.2±6.4)d]和住院费用[(50 862.2±21 300.0)元比(66 522.1±27 445.0)元]较分次PCI组显著降低(均为P<0.05)。一次PCI组主要并发症较分次PCI组有增加趋势(13.3%比7.1%),但差异无统计学意义(P=0.21)。随访12个月,一次PCI组患者LVEF优于分次PCI组(59.6%±2.7%比54.2%±4.9%,P=0.03),且MACE发生率较分次PCI组显著降低[6(10.3%)比22(23.7%),P<0.0001]。结论本研究提示一次PCI完全血运重建可减少住院时间和住院费用,改善患者心功能和降低术后MACE发生率。     

FFR指导下功能性完全血运重建对NSTEMI并发多支病变患者短期预后影响

目的 评价血流储备分数（FFR）指导下功能性完全血运重建对非ST段抬高型心肌梗死（NSTEMI）并发多支病变患者短期预后的影响。方法 选取西京医院心血管内科95例NSTEMI并发多支病变患者为功能性完全血运重建组(冠脉造影狭窄>90%的病变直接行PCI治疗,对狭窄70%~90%的病变行FFR检查,FFR<0.75为PCI治疗的指征),同时期冠脉造影指导下完全血运重建的患者为对照(解剖学完全血运重运组)组（狭窄≥70%且直径>2.5 mm的病变常规行PCI治疗）。患者随访12个月,比较两组患者主要不良心血管事件（MACE）及再发心绞痛、因冠心病再住院发生情况和左室射血分数(LVEF)的变化。结果 与对照组比较,功能性完全血运重建组再发心绞痛〔9% vs. 30%,P<0.01〕、因冠心病再住院〔5% vs. 19%,P<0.01〕及MACE〔9% vs. 22%,P<0.05〕发生率均显著降低;两组LVEF均较术前增加〔(60±7)% vs.(56±8)%〕,功能性完全血运重建组增加显著(均P<0.05)。结论 FFR指导下功能性完全血运重建能降低患者12个月MACE发生率,减少再发心绞痛、因冠心病再住院次数,改善患者左心功能,患者近期获益明显。     

Primary PCI in STEMI--dilemmas and controversies: multivessel disease in STEMI patients. Complete versus Culprit Vessel revascularization in acute ST--elevation myocardial infarction

The best strategy regarding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in multivessel disease is an unresolved issue. Although current guidelines recommend that PCI in non-culprit arteries should not be attempted unless the patient is hemodynamically unstable, it is unclear whether PCI of the infarct-related artery only or a strategy of complete revascularization, either in a simultaneous or staged multivessel PCI approach, will improve outcome. Based on available data, PCI of the culprit lesion has the advantages of shorter procedure duration, a smaller amount of dye used, and a lower rate of periprocedural myocardial infarctions, while complete revascularization has lower rates of recurrent angina and a better left ventricular ejection fraction. Although data available give controversial results for the right strategy to choose, the only adequately powered randomized controlled trial shows that a strategy of multivessel PCI should be pursued notwithstanding the timing of complete revascularization. However, to avoid the potential risks of simultaneous multivessel PCI, a strategy of staged complete revascularization appears to be the best choice. It should be considered whether current guidelines should be changed to account for these considerations, and other adequately powered randomized controlled trials should be performed to endorse current knowledge.     

不同血运重建策略对老年非ST段抬高型急性冠脉综合征合并多支血管病变患者预后的影响

目的比较一次与分次经皮冠状动脉介入(PCI)治疗完全血运重建对高龄非ST段抬高型急性冠脉综合征(NSTE-ACS)合并多支血管病变(MVD)患者预后的影响。方法回顾性分析陕西省第四人民医院心血管内科2016年6月至2017年1月住院治疗的高龄NSTE-ACS合并MVD患者110例,其中男性67例,女性43例,年龄(63.1±8.5)岁。根据完全血运重建策略不同分为一次PCI组(n=48)和分次PCI组(n=62),比较两组患者PCI治疗、住院期间主要并发症和院内主要不良心血管事件(MACEs)发生率。术后对患者随访6个月,比较两组心功能、心绞痛症状改善情况和MACEs发生率。采用SPSS 19.0统计软件对数据进行分析。组间比较采用t检验或x~2检验。结果患者术前左室射血分数(LVEF)和院内全球急性冠状动脉事件注册(GRACE)评分差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。分次PCI组单次造影剂用量明显低于一次PCI组[(180.0±60.0)vs(230.0±70.0)ml,P=0.04],院内MACEs和住院期间主要并发症较一次次PCI组显著降低[1.6%(1/62)vs 10.4%(5/48),P=0.04;4.8%(3/62)vs 18.8%(9/48),P=0.02]。随访6个月结果表明分次PCI组较一次PCI组MACEs发生率降低[4.9%(3/61》)vs 17.4%(8/46),P=0.03]。结论分次PCI完全血运重建安全有效,可能是高龄NSTE-ACS合并MVD患者优先选用的介入治疗策略。     

Impact of multivessel disease on infarct size among STEMI patients undergoing primary angioplasty

Background

Although primary angioplasty achieves Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 3 flow in most patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, epicardial recanalization does not guarantee optimal perfusion in a large proportion of patients. Multivessel disease has been demonstrated to be associated with impaired survival, however its impact on infarct size has not been largely investigated, that therefore is the aim of the current study.

Methods

Our population is represented by 827 STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI. Infarct size was evaluated at 30 days by technetium-99m-sestamibi.

Results

Multivessel disease was observed in 343 patients (41.5%). It was associated with older age (65 [57–74] vs 63 [53–71], p < 0.001), higher rate of previous MI (6.4% vs 2.5%, p = 0.005), longer ischemia time evaluated as continuous variable (210 [155–280] min vs 196 [145–270] min, p = 0.065) or percentage of patients with ischemia time >3 h (63.7% vs 56.4%, p = 0.038), and a trend in more cardiogenic shock (5.5% vs 2.9%, p = 0.055). Patients with multivessel disease received more often Abciximab (92.1% vs 88.4%, p < 0.001), Intra-aortic balloon pump (6.4% vs 1.9%, p < 0.001). No differences were observed in other clinical or angiographic characteristics. In particular, multivessel disease did not affect the rate of postprocedural TIMI 3 flow (90.9% vs 93.4%, p = 0.18) and ST-segment resolution (52.4% vs 54.9%, p = 0.48). Multivessel disease did not affect infarct size (12.7% [4.5%–24.9%] vs 12.3% [4%–24.1%], p = 0.58). Similar results were observed in subanalyses without any significant interaction for each variable (anterior infarct location (p int = 0.23), gender (p int = 0.9), age (p int = 0.7), diabetes (p int = 0.15)). The absence of any impact of multivessel disease on infarct size was confirmed when the analysis was conducted according to the percentage of patients with infarct size above the median, even after correction for baseline characteristics, such as age, previous MI, ischemia time, use of Gp IIb–IIIa inhibitors, cardiogenic shock, ischemia time (OR [95% CI] = 1.09 [0.82–1.45], p = 0.58).

Conclusions

This study shows that among STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI multivessel disease does not affect infarct size.     

Complete surgical revascularization: the treatment of choice in young patients with multivessel coronary disease

Since the advent of coronary angioplasty, nonoperative techniques to manage coronary artery disease have become attractive alternatives to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). To provide a standard against which new procedures could be judged, 123 consecutive patients less than 45 years of age who have had CABG since 1978 were systematically followed. The indications for operation were unstable angina or postinfarction angina (60%), life-threatening coronary anatomy with stable angine (36%), and sudden death or uncontrolled ventricular tachycardia (4%). Seventy-five patients had documented preoperative myocardial infarction, 55% within 30 days of CABG. An average of 3.2 vessels were grafted per patient; only 10 had single CABG. Complete revascularization was accomplished in 91% of patients. Five patients (4%) had myocardial infarction within 30 days of operation. No operative deaths or strokes occurred. The 6-year follow-up was 94.4% (the 5-year actuarial survival rate, 87.4%). There were four late deaths; two were due to myocardial infarction, one to prosthetic valve failure, and one to sudden death. At 2.7 years, 88.1% of the patients were NYHA Functional Class I; 85.4% continued full-time employment, and 98% considered their quality of life the same or better than before CABG. Five patients suffered myocardial infarctions during the follow-up period. Nine patients required reoperation: eight for graft occlusion (three less than 1 year, five greater than 3 years), and one for disease progression. These data confirm that complete operative revascularization remains the standard of therapy for young patients with multivessel coronary artery disease as evidenced by the absence of early mortality, the low incidence of morbidity, the excellent functional recovery, and the high return to gainful employment.     

FFR指导下多支血管病变功能性血运重建的临床研究进展

多支血管病变（MVD）冠脉病变复杂,血运重建治疗策略的选择是介入治疗的难点。既往认为MVD解剖学完全血运重建可改善患者预后,但最近研究显示解剖学完全血运重建(PCI或CABG)并不能显著改善患者的预后,血运重建的生存获益与心肌缺血的风险相关,提示应重视缺血相关的功能性血运重建。血流贮备分数(FFR)是判断冠脉狭窄有无功能性缺血的生理学检查指标,能准确识别MVD中真正引起心肌功能性缺血的罪犯血管。本文就FFR指导下MVD功能性血运重建的临床研究进展做一综述。     

曲美他嗪对冠脉多支病变血运重建不完全患者的疗效

目的：评价曲美他嗪对冠脉多支病变血运重建不完全患者的疗效。方法：选择冠脉多支病变血运重建不完全患者82例，随机分为治疗组及对照组，两组均于介入治疗后行常规治疗，同时治疗组还13服曲美他嗪，观察两组心功能、心绞痛的改善及心血管事件的发生。结果：治疗组与对照组比较总有效率为92．9％：80．0％（P〈0．05），较之对照组，治疗组的心功能有明显改善，复发心绞痛明显减少（P均〈0．05），治疗组的心血管事件较对照组减少，但无统计学意义。结论：在常规治疗的基础上加用曲美他嗪对冠脉多支病变血运重建不完全的患者有一定疗效。