《冠状动脉旁路移植手术(CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT SURGERY) CABG后抗血小板治疗》

  • 来源专题:心血管疾病防治
  • 编译者: 张燕舞
  • 发布时间:2018-05-22
  • 冠状动脉旁路移植手术(CABG)后给予长期阿司匹林预防大隐静脉移植物闭塞并减少心血管不良事件的发生率。 有人认为加入有效的P2Y12受体阻断剂如替格瑞洛可能会进一步改善预后。 在DACAB试验中,接受CABG的500名患者在术后24小时内被随机分配为替格瑞洛加阿司匹林,单用替格瑞洛或单用阿司匹林。 通过心血管成像确定的主要终点,一年的隐静脉移植通畅分别发生在三组静脉移植物中约89%,83%和77%。 虽然替卡格雷与阿司匹林的添加统计学上比单独使用阿司匹林更有效,但我们不推荐使用它,并担心增加出血风险的可能性,并等待临床结果的临床试验结果。

    Importance The effect of ticagrelor with or without aspirin on saphenous vein graft patency in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is unknown.

    Objective To compare the effect of ticagrelor + aspirin or ticagrelor alone vs aspirin alone on saphenous vein graft patency 1 year after CABG.

    Design, Setting, and Participants Randomized, multicenter, open-label, clinical trial among 6 tertiary hospitals in China. Eligible patients were aged 18 to 80 years with indications for elective CABG. Patients requiring urgent revascularization, concomitant cardiac surgery, dual antiplatelet or vitamin K antagonist therapy post-CABG, and who were at risk of serious bleeding were excluded. From July 2014 until November 2015, 1256 patients were identified and 500 were enrolled. Follow-up was completed in January 2017.

    Interventions Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to start ticagrelor (90 mg twice daily) + aspirin (100 mg once daily) (n = 168), ticagrelor (90 mg twice daily) (n = 166), or aspirin (100 mg once daily) (n = 166) within 24 hours post-CABG. Neither patients nor treating physicians were blinded to allocation.

    Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcome was saphenous vein graft patency 1 year after CABG (FitzGibbon grade A) adjudicated independently by a committee blinded to allocation. Saphenous vein graft patency was assessed by multislice computed tomographic angiography or coronary angiography.

    Results Among 500 randomized patients (mean age, 63.6 years; women, 91 [18.2%]), 461 (92.2%) completed the trial. Saphenous vein graft patency rates 1 year post-CABG were 88.7% (432 of 487 vein grafts) with ticagrelor + aspirin; 82.8% (404 of 488 vein grafts) with ticagrelor alone; and 76.5% (371 of 485 vein grafts) with aspirin alone. The difference between ticagrelor + aspirin vs aspirin alone was statistically significant (12.2% [95% CI, 5.2% to 19.2%]; P < .001), whereas the difference between ticagrelor alone vs aspirin alone was not statistically significant (6.3% [95% CI, -1.1% to 13.7%]; P = .10). Five major bleeding episodes occurred during 1 year of follow-up (3 with ticagrelor + aspirin; 2 with ticagrelor alone).

    Conclusions and Relevance Among patients undergoing elective CABG with saphenous vein grafting, ticagrelor + aspirin significantly increased graft patency after 1 year vs aspirin alone; there was no significant difference between ticagrelor alone and aspirin alone. Further research with more patients is needed to assess comparative bleeding risks.Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02201771.

  • 原文来源:https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2679276
相关报告
  • 《既往冠状动脉旁路移植术的非ST段抬高型急性冠状动脉综合征:侵入性与保守性治疗的荟萃分析》

    • 来源专题:医学前沿技术
    • 编译者:蒋君
    • 发布时间:2024-07-22
    • 背景和目标 建议采用常规侵入性策略来管理非ST段抬高型急性冠状动脉综合征(NSTE ACSs)的高危患者。然而,之前接受过冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)手术的患者被排除在为这些指南提供信息的关键试验之外。因此,在这个特定的亚组中,常规侵入性策略的益处不太确定。 方法 对随机对照试验(RCTs)进行了系统评价和荟萃分析。对PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane和ClinicalTrials.gov进行了全面搜索。符合条件的研究是针对非ST段抬高型急性冠状动脉综合征患者(包括既往冠状动脉旁路移植术患者)的常规侵入性与保守或选择性侵入性策略的随机对照试验。如果之前没有发表过,则从每个试验的作者那里收集汇总数据。评估的结果为全因死亡率、心脏死亡率、心肌梗死和心脏相关住院。使用随机效应模型,计算了95%置信区间(CI)的风险比(RR)。 结果 总结数据来自11项随机对照试验,包括9项试验的先前未发表的亚组结果,包括897名既往冠状动脉旁路移植术患者(477名常规侵入性,420名保守/选择性侵入性),随访加权平均2.0年(范围0.5-10年)。常规侵入性策略并没有降低全因死亡率(RR 1.12,95%CI 0.97-1.29)、心脏死亡率(RR 1.05,95%CI 0.70-1.58)、心肌梗死(RR 0.90,95%CI0.65-1.23)或心脏相关住院率(RR 1.05,95%CI 0.758-1.40)。 结论 这是首次荟萃分析,评估了常规侵入性策略对患有非ST段抬高型心肌梗死的既往冠状动脉旁路移植术患者的影响。结果证实,该患者组在非ST段抬高型急性冠状动脉综合征侵入性治疗的随机对照试验中代表性不足,并表明与保守治疗相比,常规侵入性策略在重大不良心脏事件方面没有益处。这些发现应在一个有足够能力的随机对照试验中得到验证。
  • 《PCI后冠状动脉病变与多支血管病变的CABG死亡率》

    • 来源专题:心血管疾病防治
    • 编译者:张燕舞
    • 发布时间:2018-05-22
    • 对于需要血运重建的稳定多支冠状动脉疾病(CAD)患者,经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)和冠状动脉搭桥手术(CABG)之间的选择可能很困难。 2018年对来自11项比较两种血运重建策略的随机试验的个体患者数据汇总分析显示,多支血管病患者的5年全因死亡率高于PCI。 然而,预先指定的亚组分析发现,没有糖尿病的患者和疾病较轻的患者的CABG没有显着的死亡率益处。 这项荟萃分析提高了我们的舒适度,提供PCI作为无糖尿病或复杂疾病患者的CABG替代方案。 BACKGROUND Numerous randomised trials have compared coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with coronary artery disease. However, no studies have been powered to detect a difference in mortality between the revascularisation strategies. METHODS We did a systematic review up to July 19, 2017, to identify randomised clinical trials comparing CABG with PCI using stents. Eligible studies included patients with multivessel or left main coronary artery disease who did not present with acute myocardial infarction, did PCI with stents (bare-metal or drug-eluting), and had more than 1 year of follow-up for all-cause mortality. In a collaborative, pooled analysis of individual patient data from the identified trials, we estimated all-cause mortality up to 5 years using Kaplan-Meier analyses and compared PCI with CABG using a random-effects Cox proportional-hazards model stratified by trial. Consistency of treatment effect was explored in subgroup analyses, with subgroups defined according to baseline clinical and anatomical characteristics. FINDINGS We included 11 randomised trials involving 11?518 patients selected by heart teams who were assigned to PCI (n=5753) or to CABG (n=5765). 976 patients died over a mean follow-up of 3·8 years (SD 1·4). Mean Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score was 26·0 (SD 9·5), with 1798 (22·1%) of 8138 patients having a SYNTAX score of 33 or higher. 5 year all-cause mortality was 11·2% after PCI and 9·2% after CABG (hazard ratio [HR]1·20, 95% CI 1·06-1·37; p=0·0038). 5 year all-cause mortality was significantly different between the interventions in patients with multivessel disease (11·5% after PCI vs 8·9% after CABG; HR 1·28, 95% CI 1·09-1·49; p=0·0019), including in those with diabetes (15·5% vs 10·0%; 1·48, 1·19-1·84; p=0·0004), but not in those without diabetes (8·7% vs 8·0%; 1·08, 0·86-1·36; p=0·49). SYNTAX score had a significant effect on the difference between the interventions in multivessel disease. 5 year all-cause mortality was similar between the interventions in patients with left main disease (10·7% after PCI vs 10·5% after CABG; 1·07, 0·87-1·33; p=0·52), regardless of diabetes status and SYNTAX score. INTERPRETATION CABG had a mortality benefit over PCI in patients with multivessel disease, particularly those with diabetes and higher coronary complexity. No benefit for CABG over PCI was seen in patients with left main disease.Longer follow-up is needed to better define mortality differences between the revascularisation strategies.