Prognosis comparison of vascular in situ and bridge vessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with recurrent angina after coronary artery bypass grafting
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1008?6315.2017.09.008
- VernacularTitle:原位血管与桥血管不同介入治疗策略在冠状动脉旁路移植术后心绞痛复发患者中的预后对比
- Author:
Haijian CHEN
;
Ni MO
;
Xiulong ZHU
;
Yong CAO
;
Zhibao WEI
;
Yan CHEN
;
Guozhu SU
;
Handong WU
- Keywords:
Coronary artery bypass grafting;
Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty;
Vascular graft;
Treatment outcome;
Prognosis
- From:
Clinical Medicine of China
2017;33(9):802-806
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the prognosis of vascular in situ and bridge vessel percutaneous coronary intervention ( PCI) therapy strategies in patients with recurrent angina after coronary artery bypass grafting ( CABG) . Methods A total of one hundred and two patients with recurrent angina after CABG from January 2008 to January 2016 were involved in this study and were divided into two groups according to interventional therapy strategy:74 patients in the vascular in situ PCI group ( in situ group,74 cases) and 28 patients for bridge vessel PCI group ( bridge vessel group,28 cases) . The patients have been followed up for (33. 6± 10. 2) months. The major adverse cardiovascular events ( MACE) of the two groups were recorded, including non?fatal acute myocardial infarction ( AMI) ,target vessel revascularization ( TVR) and cardiac death, and multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the related factors of MACE. Results Compared with the bridge vessel group,the non?MACE survival rate,non?AMI survival rate and non?TVR survival rate of the in situ group were significantly increased ( ( 71. 6% ( 53/74 ) vs. 57. 1% ( 16/28 ) , 93. 2% ( 69/74 ) vs. 82. 1% (23/28),81. 1% (60/74) vs. 67. 9% (19/28) ),the differences were statistically significant (χ2=8. 141,4. 219,5. 436, P<0. 05) . Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that age of bridge ( OR=1. 023,95%CI 1. 005-1. 026,P=0. 019) ,diabetes mellitus ( OR=2. 386,95%CI 1. 425-3. 991,P=0. 003) and bridge vessel PCI (OR=1. 884,95%CI 1. 093-3. 220,P=0. 025) were factors that affect the clinical prognosis in patients with recurrent angina pectoris after CABG. Conclusion The clinical prognosis of the in situ PCI is better than bridge vascular PCI in patients with recurrent angina after CABG,while the age of bridge, diabetes mellitus, vascular interventional treatment are factors for the effect of interventional therapy patients prognosis. The clinical prognosis is much better in native vessel PCI than that of bridge vessel PCI in patients with recurrent angina after CABG. The age of bridge,diabetes mellitus and bridge vessel PCI are the factors that affect the clinical prognosis in the patients.
