首页> 外文期刊>Medicine. >Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices in high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis of randomized trials
【24h】

Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices in high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis of randomized trials

机译:经皮冠状动脉介入的高风险患者经皮机械循环支撑装置:随机试验的荟萃分析

获取原文
       

摘要

Background: Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices (pMCSDs) are increasingly used on the assumption (but without solid proof) that their use will improve prognosis. A meta-analysis was undertaken according to the PRISMA guidelines to evaluate the benefits of pMCSDs in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (hr-PCI). Methods: We searched PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Library, Clinical Trial.gov, and other databases to identify eligible studies. Relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for 30-day and 6-month all-cause mortality rates, reinfarction, and other adverse events using a random effect model. Results: Sixteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this study. In the pooled analysis, intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) was not associated with a decrease in 30-day and 6-month all-cause mortality (RR 1.01 95% CI 0.61–1.66; RR 0.88 95% CI 0.66–1.17), reinfarction (RR 0.89 95% CI 0.69–1.14), stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) (RR 1.75 95% CI 0.47–6.42), heart failure (HF) (RR 0.54 95% CI 0.11–2.66), repeat revascularization (RR 0.73 95% CI 0.25–2.10), embolization (RR 3.00 95% CI 0.13–71.61), or arrhythmia (RR 2.81 95% CI 0.30–26.11). Compared with IABP, left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) were not associated with a decrease in 30-day and 6-month all-cause mortality (RR 0.96 95% CI 0.71–1.29; RR 1.23 95% CI 0.88–1.72), reinfarction (RR 0.98 95% CI 0.68–1.42), stroke/TIA (RR 0.45 95% CI 0.1–1.95), acute kidney injury (AKI) (RR 0.83 95% CI 0.38–1.80), or arrhythmia (RR 1.52 95% CI 0.71–3.27), but LVADs were associated with a decrease in repeat revascularization (RR 0.26 95% CI 0.08–0.83). However, LVADs significantly increased the risk of bleeding compared with IABP (RR 2.85 95% CI 1.72–4.73). Conclusions: Neither LVADs nor IABP improves short or long-term survival in hr-PCI patients. LVADs are more likely to reduce repeat revascularization after PCI, but to increase the risk of bleeding events than IABP.
机译:背景:经皮机械循环支撑装置(PMCSDs)越来越多地用于假设(但没有固体证明),它们的使用将改善预后。根据PRISMA指南进行了META分析,以评估预测高风险经皮冠状动脉干预(HR-PCI)的PMCSDS的益处。方法:我们搜索了PubMed,Embase,Cochrane图书馆,临床试验.gov等数据库,以确定合格的研究。使用随机效应模型计算相对风险(RRS)和95%的置信区间(CIs),持续30天和6个月的6个月所有原因死亡率,再损伤和其他不良事件。结果:本研究纳入了16种随机对照试验(RCT)。在汇总分析中,主动脉内球囊泵(IABP)与30天和6个月的终原性死亡率的降低无关(RR 1.01 95%CI 0.61-1.66; RR 0.88 95%CI 0.66-1.17) ,Reinfarrount(RR 0.89 95%CI 0.69-1.14),中风/瞬时缺血性发作(TIA)(RR 1.75 95%CI 0.47-6.42),心力衰竭(HF)(RR 0.54 95%CI 0.11-2.66),重复血运重建(RR 0.73 95%CI 0.25-2.10),栓塞(RR 3.00 95%CI 0.13-71.61),或心律失常(RR 2.81 95%CI 0.30-26.11)。与IABP相比,左心室辅助装置(LVADS)与30天和6个月的全部原因死亡率的减少无关(RR 0.96 95%CI 0.71-1.29; RR 1.23 95%CI 0.88-1.72),重新发作(RR 0.98 95%CI 0.68-1.42),中风/ TIA(RR 0.45 95%CI 0.1-1.95),急性肾损伤(AKI)(RR 0.83 95%CI 0.38-1.80)或心律失常(RR 1.52 95%CI 0.71-3.27),但LVADS与重复血运重建的降低有关(RR 0.26 95%CI 0.08-0.83)。然而,与IABP相比,LVAD显着增加出血的风险(RR 2.85 95%CI 1.72-4.73)。结论:LVAD和IABP都没有改善HR-PCI患者的短期或长期存活。在PCI后,LVAD更有可能减少重复血运重建,而是增加比IABP的出血事件的风险。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号