老年冠状动脉多支病变患者完全和不完全血运重建远期预后的比较研究

目的:比较老年冠状动脉多支病变患者中完全和不完全血运重建策略对远期预后的影响。方法:入选2013年1月至2013年12月中国医学科学院阜外医院行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的1 152例≥60岁冠状动脉多支病变患者,按年龄分为60～64岁组(n=465)、65～69岁组(n=315)、70～74岁(n=223)和≥75岁(n=149)4个年龄组,采用多因素Cox回归分析方法比较完全和不完全血运重建患者的2年预后差异。主要终点包括全因死亡、心肌梗死、再次血运重建、脑卒中和支架内血栓。结果:535例(46.4%)患者接受完全血运重建。完全血运重建患者中有9.5%发生主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE),而不完全血运重建患者中有14.7%发生MACCE(P=0.007)。多因素Cox生存分析显示,与不完全血运重建患者相比,完全血运重建患者MACCE发生风险显著降低(HR=0.697,95%CI:0.493～0.986,P=0.041);亚组分析显示,急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)患者(HR=0.647,95%CI:0.419～0.998,P=0.049)和双支病变患者(HR=0.386,95%CI:0.158～0.946,P=0.037)在完全血运重建中获益更大,稳定性冠心病患者在完全血运重建中并无明显获益(HR=0.774,95%CI:0.434～1.379,P=0.384)。结论:60岁以上老年冠状动脉多支病变患者行完全血运重建的预后优于不完全血运重建,但仅见于ACS患者。     

老年冠状动脉3支病变PCI血运重建策略对预后的影响

目的:探究老年冠状动脉(冠脉)3支病变患者接受完全血运重建与不完全血运重建的远期预后差异。方法:入选我院2008-01-01-2013-06-30就诊、就诊年龄≥70岁,冠脉造影发现未处理3支病变,并在我院接受PCI治疗患者,记录基线数据,并根据血运重建方式分为完全血运重建(complete revascularization,CR)组68例与非完全血运重建(incomplete revascularization,IR)组251例,随访时详细记录患者主要心脑血管不良事件(MACCE)发生情况,采用单因素、多因素分析探究血运重建程度对患者远期预后影响。结果:平均随访(4.40±1.49)年,两组MACCE发生差异无统计学意义(IR组29.48%,CR组29.41%,P=0.9910)。CR组患者全因死亡率低于IR组(5.88%∶17.93%,P=0.0076),多因素分析显示完全血运重建是全因死亡的保护因素(HR=0.29,P=0.0204)。结论:老年冠心病3支病变患者PCI行完全血运重建预后较好。     

稳定性冠心病患者冠状动脉血运重建指征适宜程度的多中心研究

目的:本研究旨在评价稳定性冠心病患者冠状动脉血运重建指征选择的适宜程度。方法:本研究是一项多中心、横断面研究,入选于我国4家心脏中心行择期冠状动脉造影发现至少一支冠状动脉狭窄≥50%的稳定性冠心病患者。以《中国冠状动脉血运重建适宜性标准的建议(试行)》评价冠状动脉血运重建指征选择的适宜程度。结果:2016年8月至2017年8月连续入选5 875例稳定性冠心病患者。根据血运重建适宜性标准评判,18.1%(1064/5 875)的患者指征选择不适宜,43.6%(2 560/5 875)的患者指征选择可能适宜,38.3%(2 251/5 875)的患者指征选择适宜。在376例行冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的患者中,3.5%(13/376)指征选择不适宜;在3 452例行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的患者中,20.9%(723/3 452)的指征选择不适宜。在2 047例接受药物治疗的患者中,16.0%(328/2 047)的指征选择不适宜。不适宜的指征选择多出现在无心绞痛症状的患者中(P0.001)。指征选择不适宜率在不同术者间差异显著(5.3%～25.0%,n=42)。结论:在这项大型多中心研究中,18.1%的患者治疗决策不适宜,不适宜率在不同术者间差异显著。20.9%的PCI和16.0%的药物治疗指征选择不适宜,CABG指征选择适宜程度较好。(临床试验注册机构及注册号:ClinicalTrials.gov;NCT02880605)     

住院期间完全血运重建与仅罪犯血管血运重建对ST段抬高型心肌梗死合并多支血管病变患者远期预后的影响

目的:比较住院期间经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)部分血运重建(IRA-only)和完全血运重建(CR)治疗急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)合并多支冠状动脉病变患者的远期预后。方法:回顾性分析2008年1月至2011年7月发病12 h内到达北京朝阳医院心脏中心并接受急诊PCI的592例合并多支冠状动脉病变的STEMI患者,在住院期间择期干预非罪犯血管为CR组(n=341),择期PCI平均延迟(5.2±2.2)天;未干预非罪犯病变的患者为IRA-only组(n=251)。所有患者置入药物洗脱支架。比较两组患者远期预后,其中主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE)包括全因死亡、再发心肌梗死、脑卒中以及再次冠状动脉血运重建。结果:两组临床基线特征相似,具备可比性。随访7～10年,平均随访(105.0±13.6)个月期间,CR组MACCE发生率与IRA-only组无显著差异(21.2%vs 26.0%,P=0.26),两组死亡、脑卒中及再发心肌梗死无显著差异,IRAonly组仅再次血运重建率显著高于CR组(21.5%vs 14.8%,OR=1.48,95%CI:1.01～2.18,P=0.04),主要表现在非罪犯血管再次血运重建率较高(14.6%vs 5.7%, OR=2.69,95%CI:1.54～4.69,P0.001)。结论:对于已经接受急诊PCI合并多支血管病变的STEMI患者,住院期间择期干预非罪犯病变血管未降低远期MACCE。     

合并射血分数减低的复杂冠状动脉病变患者接受不同血运重建术疗效分析

目的探讨冠状动脉左主干(LM)病变和(或)三支血管病变的冠心病患者,在同时合并射血分数减低的心力衰竭(HFrEF)情况下,接受不同血运重建策略治疗对近期及远期预后的影响。方法选取2009年1月至2018年1月就诊于首都医科大学附属北京安贞医院合并HFrEF并成功行血运重建治疗的LM病变和(或)三支病变冠心病患者进行病例注册分析。根据纳入及排除标准最终入选患者902例,其中接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)置入药物洗脱支架228例(PCI组),接受冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)治疗674例(CABG组)。根据术后平均3.1年随访资料对两组患者主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE)进行比较,同时分析左心功能变化情况。结果经单因素回归分析后,将差异具有统计学意义的因素(吸烟史、陈旧性前壁心肌梗死病史、既往PCI史、既往CABG史、SYNTAX评分)纳入Cox多因素回归分析,结果显示:成功进行血运重建治疗后1年CABG组患者的MACCE发生率高于PCI组(17.66%比14.04%,HR 1.362,95%CI 1.211~2.070,P<0.010)。对MACCE单个事件比较显示,CABG组患者的全因死亡率高于PCI组(12.61%比6.14%,HR 2.134,95%CI 1.832~3.182,P<0.010),而再次血运重建率较低(2.97%比4.82%,HR 0.696,95%CI 0.518~0.922,P=0.026);两组患者卒中及因心力衰竭入院事件发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。经多因素回归分析校正混杂因素,术后3年随访结果显示:两组患者的MACCE发生率相似,同时在单独事件全因死亡风险、心原性死亡风险方面差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。相较于PCI组,CABG组具有较高的卒中发生率(5.93%比3.07%,HR 1.894,95%CI 1.528~2.673,P=0.014)和较低的再次血运重建率(8.31%比13.16%,HR 0.558,95%CI 0.362~0.714,P<0.010)。并依据SYNTAX评分分值分为SYNTAX评分低分(≤22分)、SYNTAX评分中分(23~32分)、SYNTAX评分高分(≥33分),单因素回归分析筛选各组间具有统计学差异的因素纳入Cox多因素回归分析,经校正混杂因素后术后3年随访结果显示,对于SYNTAX评分低分患者,CABG组心原性死亡风险高于PCI组(HR 1.253,95%CI 0.748~2.003,P=0.048),两组全因死亡风险相似;而对于SYNTAX评分高分患者,CABG组的全因死亡事件、心原性死亡发生率均略低于PCI组,但差异均无统计学意义(HR 0.796,95%CI 0.318~1.274,P=0.057;HR 0.941,95%CI 0.295~1.681,P=0.623)。结论合并HFrEF的复杂冠状动脉病变的冠心病患者接受PCI的远期预后并不劣于接受CABG治疗,对于存在左心功能障碍的冠心病患者,PCI也可作为血运重建治疗策略。     

高龄无保护左主干病变患者血运重建术的长期预后

目的:本研究旨在对比经皮冠状动脉介入术(PCI)和冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)治疗高龄(≥65岁)无保护左主干病变(ULMCA)的长期预后。方法:入选2003年1月至2009年7月,北京安贞医院行PCI或CABG治疗的高龄(≥65岁)ULMCA患者427例(210例行PCI置入药物洗脱支架,217例行CABG),研究终点包括全因死亡、心肌梗死、再次血运重建、卒中、心源性死亡/心肌梗死/卒中联合硬终点以及主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE,包括心原性死亡、非致命性心肌梗死、卒中及再次血运重建的联合终点)。Cox比例风险模型用以计算风险比(HR)及95%可信区间(CI),及多因素分析。结果:随访时间7.0(5.2,8.1)年,校正前结果显示,心源性死亡/心肌梗死/卒中联合硬终点发生率CABG组显著高于PCI组(HR=1.544,95%CI:1.003～2.375,P=0.048)。卒中发生率CABG组显著高于PCI组(HR=3.089,95%CI:1.332～7.162,P=0.009)。再次血运重建发生率PCI组显著高于CABG组(HR=0.278,95%CI:0.159～0.486,P0.001)。全因死亡率两组间差异无统计学意义(HR=1.545,95%CI:0.951～2.510,P=0.079)。非致命性心肌梗死发生率两组间差异无统计学意义(HR=0.619,95%CI:0.314～1.222,P=0.167)。MACCE发生率两组间差异无统计学意义(HR=0.770,95%CI:0.550～1.079;P=0.129)。经Cox多因素分析校正后,CABG组心源性死亡/心肌梗死/卒中联合硬终点发生率仍显著高于PCI组(P=0.048),CABG组卒中发生率显著高于PCI组(P=0.011),PCI组MACCE发生率显著高于CABG组(P=0.027),主要由于PCI组较CABG组显著升高的再次血运重建率(P0.001),死亡、心肌梗死经校正后两组间差异无统计学意义。结论:CABG较PCI治疗高龄ULMCA患者的卒中发生率及心源性死亡、卒中、心肌梗死联合终点发生率显著升高,PCI组再次血运重建率显著升高。     

老年多支血管病变患者置入药物洗脱支架与冠状动脉旁路移植术后近远期临床结果

目的:本研究旨在比较老年(年龄≥75岁)稳定性冠心病合并多支血管病变患者行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)置入药物洗脱支架(DES)与冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的近远期临床结果。方法:本研究于2003年7月至2006年12月,连续入选年龄≥75岁稳定性冠心病合并多支血管病变患者363例,在我院行PCI置入DES(n=269)或CABG(n=94)治疗。主要终点为24个月时主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE),次要终点为24个月时全因死亡及非致死性心肌梗死(MI)、脑血管事件和再次血运重建以及全因死亡、非致死性MI和脑血管事件复合终点事件。结果:住院期间,CABG组的病死率(7.4%vs.1.9%,P=0.023)和非致死性MI的发生率(3.2%vs.0,P=0.023),明显高于DES组,CABG组的MACCE的发生率也明显高于DES组(10.6%vs.1.9%,P=0.001)。多因素回归分析结果显示:24个月时,CABG组和DES组的主要终点事件的风险未见明显差异[22.3%vs.15.2%,风险比(HR)=1.62,95%CI 0.63～3.31,P=0.379],两组的全因死亡、心源性死亡、非致死性MI、脑血管事件和再次血运重建的风险也没有明显差异;CABG组全因死亡、非致死性MI和脑血管事件复合终点事件的风险明显高于DES组(19.1%vs.8.2%,HR 3.87,95%CI:1.24～12.37,P=0.009)。结论:本研究提示,与DES相比,CABG可能会增加75岁以上多支血管病变患者的远期全因死亡、非致死性MI和脑血管事件复合终点事件的风险,而未降低再次血运重建和MACCE。     

老年冠心病患者血运重建后影响预后的因素

目的 分析老年(≥65岁)冠心病患者接受血运重建后影响其预后的因素.方法 6005例接受了血运重建,包括经皮冠脉介入治疗(PCI)和冠状动脉搭桥(CABG)的冠心病患者根据年龄分为两组,老年组(≥65岁,3728例)和对照组(＜65岁,2277例),对患者进行电话或门诊随访,随访的中位数为555 d,比较两组间临床情况和预后.结果 两组间血运重建总死亡率和MACCE发生率差异有统计学意义,其中总死亡率(老年组与对照组)为3.5%与1.6%(P=0.001),MACCE为12%与3.9%(P=0.001).与对照组相比,老年患者合并高血压、糖尿病以及脑血管病史、陈旧心梗史的发生率明显要高,而ST段抬高心梗、三支病变、左主干病变、CTO发生率也明显高,内生肌酐清除率、完全血运重建率却低.Cox多因素回归分析发现,糖尿病(HR 2.011,95%CI 1.093～3.697,P=0.027)、三支血管病变(HR 2.036,95%CI 1.123～3.813,P=0.017)、老年(≥65岁,HR 5.605,95% CI 2.001～15.705,P＜0.001)是总死亡率增加的独立危险因素,而内生肌酐清除率(HR 1.923,95% CI 1.107～3.203,P=0.013)、左主干病变(HR 1.877,95% CI 1.193～2.978,P=0.001)、三支血管病变(HR 1.515,95% CI 1.243～1.806,P=0.007)是MACCE发生率增加的独立危险因素.结论 糖尿病、三支血管病变、老年(≥65岁)是老年冠心病患者血运重建后总死亡率增加的独立危险因素,而内生肌酐清除率、左主干病变、三支血管病变是MACCE发生率增加的独立危险因素.     

老年糖尿病患者冠状动脉支架术后再次血运重建的预测因素和影响

目的分析老年冠心病合并糖尿病患者置入药物洗脱支架(DES)后2年内非计划的再次血运重建的发生率和预测因素。方法入选2010年12月~2013年12月在北京安贞医院成功置入DES的老年冠心病合并糖尿病患者2764例,分为再次血运重建组(重建组)383例和非再次血运重建组(非重建组)2381例。采用多因素Cox回归分析。结果 2年内,共有383例(13.9%)患者发生再次血运重建。与非重建组比较,重建组胰岛素治疗比例更高、糖尿病病程更长(P0.05,P0.01)。多因素Cox回归分析显示,胰岛素治疗、冠状动脉旁路移植术史、糖化血红蛋白水平、LDL-C水平、多支冠状动脉介入治疗和随访时未使用他汀类药物是再次血运重建的独立预测因素。再次血运重建与随后再次心肌梗死的有关(调整HR=3.967,95%CI:1.284~6.254,P=0.017),与全因死亡无关(调整HR=6.134,95%CI:0.435~26.224,P=0.154)。结论患者疾病的严重程度、复杂的冠状动脉操作和不充分的药物治疗增加再次血运重建的风险。再次血运重建与随后的缺血性心血管事件有关。     

合并多血管疾病冠心病患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗长期预后的研究

目的:探讨合并多血管疾病对经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)后冠心病患者长期预后的影响。方法:连续纳入2013年1月至12月于中国医学科学院阜外医院行PCI的冠心病患者10 287例。多血管疾病定义为冠心病患者既往合并缺血性脑卒中和(或)外周动脉疾病。根据患者是否合并多血管疾病分为两组:多血管病组(n=1 583)和非多血管病组(n=8 704)。比较两组患者随访期间主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE),及全因死亡、心肌梗死、再次血运重建、新发脑卒中和支架内血栓形成的发生率。MACCE为全因死亡、心肌梗死、再次血运重建和新发脑卒中的复合终点。结果:1 583例(15.4%)患者合并多血管疾病。与非多血管病组患者相比,多血管病组患者老年及女性比例高,危险因素及合并症更常见,冠状动脉病变也更加复杂,差异均有统计学意义(P均0.05)。在中位随访29(1～34)个月期间,多血管病组患者MACCE(15.0%vs 11.6%,P=0.004)、全因死亡(2.5%vs 1.2%,P=0.018)、新发脑卒中(3.2%vs 1.4%,P=0.000)和支架内血栓形成(1.8%vs 0.8%,P=0.014)的发生率均高于非多血管病组患者,差异均有统计学意义。多因素Cox分析显示,合并多血管病是PCI后MACCE发生的独立危险因素(OR=1.230,95%CI:1.067～1.418,P=0.004)。另外,在多血管病组患者中,完全血运重建的患者较非完全血运重建的患者MACCE发生率低(13.1%vs16.5%,P=0.045)。结论:合并多血管疾病的冠心病患者PCI后远期预后较差,其中冠状动脉完全血运重建患者可能受益更多。     

临床表型对冠状动脉病变低危患者介入治疗远期预后的影响

目的:探讨急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)和稳定性冠心病(SCAD)对不同性别冠状动脉病变SYNTAX评分≤22分患者介入治疗远期预后的影响.方法:纳入2013年1月至12月在中国医学科学院阜外医院行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)且SYNTAX评分≤22分的患者9458例.按临床表型将不同性别的患者分为ACS和SCAD患者...     

Appropriateness Ratings of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Japan and Its Association With the Trend of Noninvasive Testing

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the appropriateness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in Japan and clarify the association between trends of pre-procedural noninvasive testing and changes in appropriateness ratings.BackgroundAlthough PCI appropriateness criteria are widely used for quality-of-care improvement, they have not been validated internationally. Furthermore, the correlation of appropriateness ratings with implementation of newly developed noninvasive testing is unclear.MethodsWe assigned an appropriateness rating to 11,258 consecutive PCIs registered in the Japanese Cardiovascular Database according to appropriateness use criteria developed in 2009 (AUC/2009) and the 2012 revised version (AUC/2012). Trends of pre-procedural noninvasive testing and appropriateness ratings were plotted; logistic regression was performed to identify inappropriate PCI predictors.ResultsIn nonacute settings, 15% of PCIs were rated inappropriate under AUC/2009, and this percent increased to 30.7% under AUC/2012 criteria. This was mostly because of the focused update of AUC, in which the patients were newly classified as inappropriate if they lacked proximal left anterior descending lesions and did not undergo pre-procedural noninvasive testing. However, these cases were simply not rated under AUC/2009. The amount of inappropriate PCIs increased over 5 years, proportional to the increase in coronary computed tomography angiography use. Use of coronary computed tomography angiography was independently associated with inappropriate PCIs (odds ratio: 1.33; p = 0.027).ConclusionsIn a multicenter, Japanese PCI registry, approximately one-sixth of nonacute PCIs were rated as inappropriate under AUC/2009, increasing to approximately one-third under the revised AUC/2012. This significant gap may reflect a needed shift in appropriateness recognition of methods for noninvasive pre-procedural evaluation of coronary artery disease.     

药物洗脱支架与冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗无保护左主干病变的临床疗效对比

目的:评估药物洗脱支架(DES)置入与冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)治疗无保护左主干病变的临床疗效。方法:分析2003-10-2010-09期间行血运重建的282例无保护左主干患者的临床资料,其中接受DES者143例(DES组),接受CABG者139例(CABG组),比较2组住院期和随访期心脑血管不良事件(死亡、非致死性心肌梗死、脑卒中和再次血运重建,即MACCE)的发生情况。结果:DES组手术成功率为100%,住院期间1例发生非致死性心肌梗死,无一例死亡、脑血管意外或需再次血运重建;CABG组手术成功率为95.7%,住院期间有1例发生非致死性急性心肌梗死,无一例需再次血运重建,共有6例死亡;CABG组住院期死亡率明显高于DES组(4.3%∶0,P<0.05),住院期CABG组总MACCE发生率也明显高于DES组(5.0%∶0.7%,P<0.05);随访期平均(17±8)个月,DES组临床心绞痛复发率和再次血运重建率较CABG组有增高趋势(7.8%∶2.7%,7.0%∶1.8%),但差异无统计学意义,其总MACCE发生率显著高于CABG组(14.8%∶7.1%,P<0.05);剔除新发病变及病变进展病例后,2组总MACCE发生率(7.8%∶7.1%)差异无统计学意义。结论:DES治疗无保护左主干病变安全和有效,可以作为CABG的一种替代治疗手段。     

冠心病患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗术后再次血运重建的危险因素研究

目的探讨冠心病患者PCI术后再次血运重建的相关因素分析。方法回顾性分析278例冠心病患者介入治疗的临床资料,分为再次血运重建组(血运重建组)55例,无再次血运重建组(无血运重建组)223例,比较2组的病史、症状和冠状动脉造影等临床资料。对复发胸痛再次血运重建的患者进行危险因素分析。结果与无血运重建组比较,血运重建组第一次入院诊断为急性心肌梗死(50.9%vs 14.3%,P=0.030)、心功能≥Ⅱ级(34.5%vs9.0%,P=0.020)、室壁运动异常(72.7%vs 26.9%,P=0.035)、多支冠状动脉病变(89.1%vs 40.4%,P=0.010)等均显著增高,差异有统计学意义。多因素logistic回归显示,复发胸痛(OR:2.49,95%CI:1.16～5.00,P=0.020)、左心室舒张末内径(OR:1.12,95%CI:1.00～1.22,P=0.043)是血运重建治疗的独立预测因素,而冠状动脉单支病变(OR:0.25,95%CI:0.15～0.90,P=0.040)和双支病变(OR:0.22,95%CI:0.07～0.53,P=0.006)较冠状动脉3支病变再次血运重建治疗风险低。结论冠心病患者PCI术后1年的随访提示,复发胸痛、严重的冠状动脉病变和左心室舒张末容积增大是再次血运重建治疗的独立危险因素。     

药物洗脱支架置入术与冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗冠心病多支病变的临床对比研究

目的:探讨药物洗脱支架(DES)治疗冠心病多支冠状动脉(冠脉)病变患者的临床疗效,并与冠脉旁路移植术进行比较.方法:入选2005-01-2008-01在我院行血管重建术的215例冠心病多支冠脉病变患者,其中114例行DES置入术(DES组),101例行冠脉旁路移植术 (CABG组).比较2组住院期和随访期不良心血管事件(死亡、非致死性心肌梗死、再次血管重建术和脑血管意外)的发生情况.结果:2组的临床和冠脉病变特征相似, 与DES组比较,CABG组左主干病变(29.2%∶5.0%,P<0.01)、LVEF<50%发生率(39.7%∶19.2%,P<0.01) 和完全血管重建率(81.2%∶58.8%, P<0.01)较高.住院期2组总体不良心血管事件发生率无明显差异,但CABG组住院期病死率有增高趋势(6.9%∶1.8%,P＞0.05).平均临床随访12～36(17±9)个月,2组总体不良心血管事件发生率仍无明显差异(9.6% ∶13.4%,P＞0.05) ,但DES组再次血管重建的发生率较CABG组有增高趋势(9.8%∶2.1%,P＞0.05).结论:DES置入术应用在冠心病多支冠脉病变患者中安全可行,总体不良心血管事件发生率与CABG无明显差异.     

Application of appropriate use criteria for percutaneous coronary intervention in Japan

The aim of this review was to summarize the concept of appropriate use criteria (AUC) regarding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and document AUC use and impact on clinical practice in Japan, in comparison with its application in the United States. AUC were originally developed to subjectively evaluate the indications and performance of various diagnostic and therapeutic modalities, including revascularization techniques. Over the years, application of AUC has significantly impacted patient selection for PCI in the United States, particularly in non-acute settings. After the broad implementation of AUC in 2009, the rate of inappropriate PCI decreased by half by 2014. The effect was further accentuated by incorporation of financial incentives (e.g., restriction of reimbursement for inappropriate procedures). On the other hand, when the United States-derived AUC were applied to Japanese patients undergoing elective PCI from 2008 to 2013, about one-third were classified as inappropriate, largely due to the perception gap between American and Japanese experts. For example, PCI for low-risk non-left atrial ascending artery lesion was more likely to be classified as appropriate by Japanese standards, and anatomical imaging with coronary computed tomography angiography was used relatively frequently in Japan, but no scenario within the current AUC includes this modality. To extrapolate the current AUC to Japan or any other region outside of the United States, these local discrepancies must be taken into consideration, and scenarios should be revised to reflect contemporary practice. Understanding the concept of AUC as well as its perception gap between different counties will result in the broader implementation of AUC, and lead to the quality improvement of patients’ care in the field of coronary intervention.     

Efficacy and Safety of Ticagrelor and Clopidogrel in Patients with Stable Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Aim: The efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in patients with stable coronary artery disease (SCAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain uncertain. Thus, this study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and clopidogrel in patients with SCAD treated with PCI. Methods: A total of 9,379 patients with SCAD undergoing PCI who received dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) were consecutively enrolled in two groups, namely, ticagrelor ( n =1,081) and clopidogrel ( n =8,298) groups. Major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) and bleeding events according to ticagrelor or clopidogrel use were compared. Results: After propensity matching ( n =1,081 in each group), ticagrelor was associated with fewer MACCEs compared with clopidogrel (3.6% vs. 5.7%, hazard ratio [HR]=0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41–0.93, p =0.019), and the difference between ticagrelor and clopidogrel for bleeding events was nonsignificant (4.0% vs. 3.2%, HR=1.24, 95% CI 0.79-1.93, p =0.356). On the other hand, the difference between ticagrelor and clopidogrel for net adverse clinical events was significant (4.1% vs. 6.0%, HR=0.67, 95% CI 0.46–0.98, p =0.039). In a multivariate analysis, the use of ticagrelor, number of stents, previous history of diabetes, previous history of smoking, and ACC/AHA type B2 or C lesions were considered independent predictors of MACCEs, while radial artery access, previous history of stroke, and weight ＜60kg were independent predictors of bleeding events. Conclusions Ticagrelor was associated with a lower incidence of MACCEs without an increased risk of bleeding events in patients with SCAD receiving PCI.     

Assessing the appropriateness of coronary revascularization: the University of Maryland Revascularization Appropriateness Score (RAS) and its comparison to RAND expert panel ratings and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines with regard to assigned appropriateness rating and ability to predict outcome

BACKGROUND: Significant regional variation in procedural frequencies has led to the development of the RAND and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines; however, they may be difficult to apply in clinical practice. The University of Maryland Revascularization Appropriateness Score (RAS) was created to address the need for a simplified point scoring system. HYPOTHESIS: The study was undertaken to compare revascularization appropriateness ratings yielded by the RAND Expert Panel Ratings, ACC/AHA guidelines, and the University of Maryland RAS. METHODS: We applied these three revascularization appropriateness scoring systems to 153 catheterization laboratory patients with a variety of cardiac diagnoses and treatments. For each patient, appropriateness scores assigned by each of the three systems were compared with each other and with the actual treatment delivered. Concordance of care with appropriateness score was then correlated with outcome. RESULTS: There were significant differences among all three scoring systems in their ratings and in the concordance of treatment with appropriateness rating. When treatment provided was concordant with RAND ratings, there was a lower occurrence of subsequent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), the composite end point of either CABG or percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA), and the composite end point of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or revascularization. When treatment was concordant with the ACC/AHA guidelines, there was lower occurrence of all-cause mortality, PTCA, the composite end point of either CABG or PTCA, and the composite end point of death, MI, or revascularization. When treatment provided was concordant with the RAS, there was lower occurrence of cardiac death, all-cause death, CABG, the composite end point of either CABG or PTCA, and the composite end point of death, MI, or revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: The RAS is a simple scoring system to assess revascularization appropriateness. When the RAND, ACC/AHA, and RAS systems are compared in a catheterization laboratory population, they rate the same patient differently and vary in their correlation of appropriateness rating with outcome.     

Impact of completeness of revascularization on the five-year outcome in percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft patients (from the ARTS-II study)

The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcome at 5 years in patients with complete and incomplete revascularization treated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents. Baseline and procedural angiograms and surgical case-record forms were centrally assessed for completeness of revascularization. Patients treated with PCI for incomplete revascularization were stratified according to Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score tertiles. Complete revascularization was achieved in 360 of 588 patients (61.2%) in the PCI with sirolimus-eluting stent group and 477 of 567 patients (84.1%) in the CABG group (p <0.05). There was no significant difference in 5-year survival without major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs; death, cerebrovascular accident, myocardial infarction, and any revascularization) between patients with complete and incomplete revascularization treated with PCI or CABG. Survival free from MACCEs in patients with incomplete revascularization treated with PCI was significantly lower than those with complete revascularization treated with CABG (hazard ratio 1.66, 0.96 to 1.80, log-rank p = 0.001). The 5-year MACCE-free survival in patients with incomplete revascularization treated with PCI stratified according to SYNTAX score tertiles showed a significantly lower MACCE survival in the higher SYNTAX tertile compared to the low (hazard ratio 0.56, 0.32 to 0.96, log-rank p = 0.04) and intermediate (hazard ratio 0.50, 0.28 to 0.91, log-rank p = 0.02) tertiles, whereas survival between the low and intermediate SYNTAX tertiles was not significantly different (hazard ratio 1.13, 0.60 to 2.13, log-rank p = 0.71). In conclusion, this study suggests that patients with complex coronary disease, in whom complete revascularization cannot be achieved with PCI, should be offered surgical revascularization. However, in those patients with less complex disease, PCI is a valid alternative even if complete revascularization cannot be achieved.     

不完全血运重建策略对老年冠状动脉多支血管病变患者预后的影响

目的回顾性分析经皮冠状动脉介入的完全及部分血运重建术对老龄冠状动脉多支血管病变患者预后影响、疗效。方法 153例年龄≥70岁的老年患者,2005年10月至2008年3月入院行冠状动脉造影检查发现为多支病变行经皮冠状动脉介入(PCI)治疗。分为接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的完全血运重建(85例)组和接受介入治疗的部分血运重建患者(68例)。记录分析两组患者临床资料、PCI结果以及围术期并发症和随访期间主要不良心脏事件(MACE)、死亡率发生情况。进行Cox回归分析影响此类患者预后的相关因素。结果老年冠心病多支病变患者PCI进行血运重建完全者与血运重建不完全者的院内围手术期及随访1年后的死亡、急性心肌梗死、总心脏死亡率等MACE的发生率差异无统计学意义。Cox多因素回归分析表明患者PCI术后1年MACE发生率与是否完全血运重建无关(HR1.328,95%CI0.253～2.652,P>0.05)。结论介入治疗完全血运重建与不完全血运重建策略对老年冠状动脉多支病变的1年临床效果相似。