我们的网站为什么显示成这样？

可能因为您的浏览器不支持样式，您可以更新您的浏览器到最新版本，以获取对此功能的支持，访问下面的网站，获取关于浏览器的信息：

|本期目录/Table of Contents|

不同冠心病危险评分评估ACS患者多支血管病变PCI术后2年预后的比较

《心脏杂志》[ISSN:1009-7236/CN:61-1268/R]

期数:
2018年第2期
页码:
162-165
栏目:
临床研究
出版日期:
2018-02-15

文章信息/Info

Title:
Evaluation to prognosis by different methods of coronary heart disease risk score in patients with acute coronary syndrome and muitivessels lesions and referred for percutaneous coronary intervention after two years
作者:
韩雅君; 王丽媛; 朱 慧; 王智谦; 赵玮祎; 王燕芳; 刘志宏
（内蒙古自治区人民医院老年心血管内科，内蒙古 呼和浩特 010017）
Author(s):
HAN Ya-jun;  WANG Li-yuan;  ZHU Hui;  WANG Zhi-qian;  ZHAO Wei-yi;  WANG Yan-fang;  LIU Zhi-hong
(Department of Elderly Cardiology, People’s Hospital of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, Huhhot 010017, Inner Mongolia, China)
关键词:
冠状动脉; 多支病变; 急性冠脉综合征; 主要不良心脑血管事件; 危险评分
Keywords:
coronary artery;  multi-vessel disease;  acute coronary syndrome;  main adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events;  risk score
分类号:
R541.4
DOI:
-
文献标识码:
A
摘要:
目的 评价不同冠心病危险评分方法对急性冠脉综合征（ACS）患者多支病变经皮冠状动脉介入（PCI）治疗术后长期预后评价能力。方法 连续入选住院ACS并行PCI患者192例，收集临床资料包括性别、年龄、临床诊断、心脏及周围血管超声、血脂、肾功能等临床资料，进行SYNTAX、SYNTAX II、临床SYNTAX、EuroScoreII评分、ESRS危险分层，同时进行2年临床随访，随访主要不良心脑血管事件（MACCE,包括全因死亡、卒中、冠脉血运重建、心力衰竭、心绞痛住院治疗）。结果 发生MACCE 24例，其中心源性死亡5例，卒中死亡2例，血运重建7例，缺血性卒中6例，心衰4例。MACCE组和无事件组的SYNTAX评分、SYNTAX II评分、临床SYNTAX 和EuroScoreII评分分别为(18±6)与(15±7)分（P<0.05）、(29±5)与(27±8)分(P<0.05)、(41±16)与(36±22)分（P<0.05）、(4.0±3.6)与(2.7±2.1)分（P<0.05）。ESRS高危、低危组事件发生率分别为29%和21%，与无事件组比较，P<0.05。SYNTAX评分、SYNTAX II评分、临床SYNTAX评分、EuroScoreII评分和ESRS预测2年终点事件的曲线下面积分别为0.631、0.631、0.630、0.634和0.656（均P<0.05）。5种评分方法危险分层均与2年MACCE相关。结论 SYNTAX评分、SYNTAX II评分、临床SYNTAX评分、EuroScore2以及ESRS危险分层对ACS行PCI后MACCE的预测能力无显著差异。
Abstract:
AIM To evaluate the ability of different scoring methods for long-term prognosis of patients with multivessel disease after PCI. METHODS 192 consecutive patients with ACS undergoing PCI at the department of Cardiology of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region people’s Hospital were studied from January 2013 to May 2014. Among the clinical data collected included gender, age, clinical diagnosis, doppler echocardiography, peripheral vascular ultrasound, blood lipids, and renal function. SYNTAX Score, SYNTAX Score II, clinical SYNTAX Score, EuroScore2, and ESRS with 2 years clinical follow-up at the same time were measured. Follow-up measurements included main adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) including all-cause death, stroke, coronary reascularization, heart failure, and hospitalization for angina pectoris. RESULTS There were 24 cases of MACCE in 192 patients with ACS, including cardiac death in 7 cases, stroke death in 2 cases, revascularization in 7 cases, ischemic stroke in 6 cases, heart failure in 4 cases. The SYNTAX score, SYNTAX score II, clinical SYNTAX score and EuroScore2 score were 18±6 vs.15±7 (P<0.05), 29±5 vs. 27±8 (P<0.05), 41±16 vs. 36±22 (P<0.05), 4.0±3.6 vs. 2.7±2.1 (P<0.05) in event group and non event groups, respectively. The rate of MACCE with ESRS in the high-risk, and low-risk groups were 29%, 21%, P<0.05, respectively. The area under the curve for predicting the 2 years endpoint events of SYNTAX score, SYNTAX score II, clinical SYNTAX score, EuroScore2 score and ESRS, respectively were 0.631, 0.631, 0.630, 0.634, 0.656 (all P<0.05). High-risk patients in risk stratification were relative to MACCE regardless of which kind of scoring methods were evaluated. CONCLUSION The SYNTAX score, SYNTAX score II, clinical SYNTAX score, EuroScore2 and ESRS utilized to predict MACCE had no significant difference.

参考文献/References

[1]Windecker S,Kolh P,Alfonso F,et al.ESC/EACTS myocardial revascularization guidelines[J].Eur Heart J,2014,35(46):3235-3236.

[2]Farooq V,van Klaveren D,Steyerberg EW,et al.Anatomical and clinical chara-cteristics to guide decision making between coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention for individual patients:development and validation of SYNTAX score II[J].Lancet,2013,381(9867):639-650.

[3]Garg S,Sarno G,Garcia-Garcia HM,et al.A new tool for the risk stratifica-tion of patients with complex coronary artery disease.The clinical SYNTAX score[J].Circ Cardiovasc Interv,2010,3(4):317-326.

[4]Capodanno D,Miano M,Cincotta G,et al.EuroSCORE refines the predictive ability of SYNTAX score in patients undergoing left main percutaneous coronary intervention[J].Am Heart J,2010,159(1):103-109.

[5]Mohr FW,Morice MC,Kappetein AP,et al.Coronary artery bypass graft surgeryversus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with three-vessel diseaseand left main coronary disease:5-year follow-up of the randomised,clinical SYNTAX trial[J].Lancet,2013,381(9867):381(9867):629-638.

[6]Borde D,Asegaonkar B,Apsingekar P,et al.Risk Stratification in Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass(OPCAB)Surgery-Role of EuroSCORE II[J].J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth,2015,29(5):1167-1171.

[7]Chen J,Tang B,Lin Y,et al.Validation of the Ability of SYNTAX and Clinical SYNTAX Scores to Predict Adverse Cardiovascular Events After Stent Implantation:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis[J].Angiology,2016,67(9):820-828.

[8]Salvatore A,Boukhris M,Giubilato S,et al.Usefulness of SYNTAX score II in complex percutaneous coronary interventions in the setting of acute coronary syndrome[J].J Saudi Heart Assoc,2016,28(2):63-72.

[9]Fukui T,Uchimuro T,Takanashi S.EuroSCORE II with SYNTAX score to assess risksof coronary artery bypass grafting outcomes[J].Eur J Cardiothorac Surg,2015,47(1):66-71.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期：2017-04-20.作者简介：韩雅君，主任医师，博士 Email：junyahan@sina.com
更新日期/Last Update: 1900-01-01