主页 > 医学信息 >
【medical-news】三种不同包被技术的雷帕霉素洗脱
Randomized trial of three rapamycin-eluting stents with different coating strategies for the reduction of coronary restenosis
abstract：
Aims: The objective of this study was to assess the non-inferiority, in terms of anti-restenotic efficacy, of both biodegradable-polymer (BP) and polymer-free (PF) stents compared with permanent-polymer rapamycin-eluting (PP; Cypher) stent.
Methods and results: Patients with de novo coronary lesions in native vessels were randomly assigned to receive a BP stent, a PF stent or a PP stent. The primary endpoint was in-stent late lumen loss at follow-up angiogram.
A total of 605 patients were enrolled: 202 patients received BP stents, 202 were treated with PP stents, and 201 received PF stents. Repeat angiography was available for 492 patients (81.3%). Mean late lumen loss at 6–8-month angiographic follow-up was 0.17 ± 0.45 mm in the BP stent group, 0.23 ± 0.46 mm in the PP cohort, and 0.47 ± 0.56 mm in the PF stent group. The BP stent met pre-specified criteria for non-inferiority (P < 0.001), whereas the PF stent did not (P = 0.94). There were no differences in safety outcomes.
Conclusion: Both BP and PF stents have a 1-year safety profile similar to that of the PP stent. Whereas the PF stent provided an inferior efficacy, the BP stent is at least as effective as the PP stent in terms of anti-restenotic efficacy
来源：
http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/29/16/1975 title：三种不同包被技术的雷帕霉素洗脱支架抑制再狭窄的随机对照研究
Randomized trial of three rapamycin-eluting stents with different coating strategies for the reduction of coronary restenosis
摘要：
目的：该试验主要目的是评价可吸收载体药物支架、无聚合物载体药物支架，较载雷帕霉素可降解聚合物涂层支架，在抑制再狭窄方面的差异性。
abstract：
Aims: The objective of this study was to assess the non-inferiority, in terms of anti-restenotic efficacy, of both biodegradable-polymer (BP) and polymer-free (PF) stents compared with permanent-polymer rapamycin-eluting (PP; Cypher) stent.
方法和结果：
将有冠状动脉再狭窄的病人随机分入BP支架组、PF支架组和PP支架组，初级终点设为随访造影支架内晚期官腔丢失的情况。
Methods and results: Patients with de novo coronary lesions in native vessels were randomly assigned to receive a BP stent, a PF stent or a PP stent. The primary endpoint was in-stent late lumen loss at follow-up angiogram.
研究共入选了605例患者，随机分为BP DES组（202例），PP DES组（202例），PF DES组（201例）。冠脉造影复查结果符合要求的492例（81.3%）。6~8个月时随访造影支架内晚期官腔丢失情况为：BP DES组（0.17 ± 0.45 mm），PP DES组（0.23 ± 0.46 mm），PF DES组（0.47 ± 0.56 mm）。BP DES组在抑制再狭窄方面功效良好（P < 0.001），PF DES组在抑制再狭窄方面效果不理想（(P = 0.94）。三组支架在安全性方面差异不大。
A total of 605 patients were enrolled: 202 patients received BP stents, 202 were treated with PP stents, and 201 received PF stents. Repeat angiography was available for 492 patients (81.3%). Mean late lumen loss at 6–8-month angiographic follow-up was 0.17 ± 0.45 mm in the BP stent group, 0.23 ± 0.46 mm in the PP cohort, and 0.47 ± 0.56 mm in the PF stent group. The BP stent met pre-specified criteria for non-inferiority (P < 0.001), whereas the PF stent did not (P = 0.94). There were no differences in safety outcomes.
结果：BP DES组、PF DES组与PP DES组在一年后的安全性方面没有显著差异。PF DES组抑制再狭窄功效最次，BP DES组与PP DES组在抑制再狭窄方面功效相似。
Conclusion: Both BP and PF stents have a 1-year safety profile similar to that of the PP stent. Whereas the PF stent provided an inferior efficacy, the BP stent is at least as effective as the PP stent in terms of anti-restenotic efficacy
来源：
http://eurheartj.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/29/16/1975 [标签:content1][标签:content2]
阅读本文的人还阅读：
作者:admin@医学,生命科学 2011-01-08 05:14
医学,生命科学网