Percutaneous coronary intervention with everolimus-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with stable angina and an isolated proximal left anterior descending artery disease
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background/Introduction Revascularization of the proximal segment of left anterior descending artery (pLAD) demonstrates an additional prognostic significance in survival for patients with multivessel disease. It is also indicated for symptomatic relief in patients with stable angina who are receiving optimal medical treatment in the presence of limiting angina or angina equivalent. Both coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are still commonly needed as therapeutic options for pLAD disease. Moreover, Everolimus-eluting stents (EES) have demonstrated superiority in safety and efficacy among other types of second or new generation drug-eluting stents. Purpose We aim to evaluate the long-term outcomes of PCI with EES compared to CABG surgery with left internal mammary artery, in patients with stable angina and an isolated single vessel pLAD disease. Methods The sample consisted of 824 patients with isolated pLAD and chronic stable angina; 445 participants were included in the EES-PCI group, and 379 were included in the CABG group. The study's primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), namely, cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) not attributed to a non-target vessel and target lesion revascularization as a composite index. Secondary endpoints were Patient-Related Outcome (PRO; a composite index of all-cause mortality, any MI related to any coronary artery, any revascularization conducted to any coronary artery), individual components of MACEs, recurrence of stable or unstable angina or a nonfatal arrhythmia and disease progression of other lesions. For the comparisons between the two groups, chi-square tests and Fisher's exact tests, were used, as appropriate. Results During the 4.6 years of follow-up period, no statistically significant difference was observed between the two study groups in respect to the primary endpoint MACE (8.1% versus 7.4%, p=0.71). Concerning secondary endpoints, repeat revascularization (3.6% versus 2.9%, p=0.58), cardiac death (2.9% versus 3.2%, p=0.84), MI (1.6% versus 1.3%, p=0.76) and PRO (16.9% versus 17.7%, p=0.76) did not significantly differ between the two groups. Recurrence of angina was more frequent in the EES-PCI group (14.9% versus 8.4%, p=0.005) even though higher Class of angina was found less common in EES patients than in CABG patients (p<0.001). Patients treated with EES-PCI had lower rates of onset of arrhythmias compared to those treated with CABG (6.3% versus 11.9%, p=0.005). Finally, revascularization in other than target lesion was more frequent in the stent than in the surgery arm (6.3% versus 3.2%, p=0.04); as a consequence, higher rates of revascularization in any vessel was recorded in the PCI group than the CABG one (9.9% versus 5.8%, p=0.03). Conclusion PCI with EES seem to have similar long-term clinical outcomes compared with CABG in patients with isolated pLAD disease. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».