郑泽,范谦,彭红玉,王健,赵东晖,吴铮,程姝娟,柳景华

• 1:首都医科大学附属北京安贞医院心内科北京市心肺血管疾病研究所

摘要(Abstract)：

目的比较既往有冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)和无CABG的原位血管慢性完全闭塞(CTO)病变行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的临床结果。方法选取2014年1月至2019年1月于首都医科大学附属北京安贞医院治疗的CTO病变行PCI的既往有CABG的CTO-PCI组患者(219例),同时选择既往无CABG的CTO-PCI组患者(528例)。比较两组患者的基线资料、PCI成功率和介入方法以及并发症等。结果既往有CABG的CTO-PCI组患者年龄[(66.5±9.4)岁比(61.1±10.2)岁,P=0.002]、高血压病(90.0%比83.0%,P=0.015)、糖尿病(40.6%比30.1%,P=0.005)和卒中史(8.7%比4.4%,P=0.020)显著高于既往无CABG的CTO-PCI组患者,差异均有统计学意义。既往有CABG的CTO-PCI组患者技术成功率(77.6%比87.1%,P=0.001)和手术成功率(74.9%比84.8%,P=0.001)显著低于既往无CABG的CTO-PCI组患者,而两组患者住院期间主要并发症的发生率(2.7%比2.3%,P=0.705)比较,差异无统计学意义。既往有CABG的CTO-PCI组患者2014年1月至2016年12月入组技术成功率[71.8%(94/131)比86.4%(76/88),P=0.038]显著低于2017年1月至2019年1月入组;既往无CABG的CTO-PCI组患者2014年1月至2016年12月入组技术成功率[83.5%(258/309)比92.2%(202/219),P=0.007]显著低于2017年1月至2019年1月入组,差异均有统计学意义。结论既往有CABG的CTO病变患者介入难度更高,可以更多地应用逆向技术来提高手术成功率。

关键词(KeyWords)： 慢性完全闭塞;冠状动脉旁路移植术;经皮冠状动脉介入治疗

Abstract:

Keywords:

基金项目(Foundation): 国家自然科学基金(81570388)

作者(Author): 郑泽,范谦,彭红玉,王健,赵东晖,吴铮,程姝娟,柳景华

参考文献(References)：

• [1] Hwang MH, Meadows WR, Palac RT, et al. Progression of native coronary artery disease at 10 years:insights from a randomized study of medical versus surgical therapy for angina. J Am Coll Cardiol, 1990,16(5):1066-1070.
• [2] Moore P, Janssen C, Murphy A, et al. Coronary angiography and revascularization after CABG in British Columbia:incidence,predictors and outcomes. Can J Cardiol,2017, 33(10):143-144.
• [3]刘圆，唐姮，孟浩宇，等.冠状动脉旁路移植术患者原位冠状动脉通畅率及行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的研究.中国介入心脏病学杂志，2019,27(2):70-75.
• [4] Tanaka A, Ishii H,Oshima H, et al. Progression from stenosis to occlusion in the proximal native coronary artery after coronary artery bypass grafting. Heart Vessels, 2016, 31(7):1056-1060.
• [5] Brilakis ES, Rao SV, Banerjee S, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention in native arteries versus bypass grafts in prior coronary artery bypass graf ting patients:a report f rom the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv, 2011,4(8):844-850.
• [6] Khialani B, Andrianopoulos N, Reid C, et al. Outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention(PCI)in patients with prior Coronary Artery Bypass Grafts(CABG). Heart Lung Circ, 2017,26(2):220-224.
• [7] Christakopoulos GE, Christopoulos G, Carlino M, et al. Metaanalysis of clinical outcomes of patients who underwent percutaneous coronary interventions for chronic total occlusions. Am J Cardiol,2015, 115(10):1367-1375.
• [8] Redfors B, Genereux P, Kirtane A, et al. Platelet reactivity and outcomes after PCI of asphenous vein grafts versus native coronary arteries:the ADAPT-DES STUDY. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2017, 69(11):1090-1095.
• [9] Sakakura K, Nakano M, Otsuka F, et al. Comparison of pathology of chronic total occlusion with and without coronary artery bypass graft. Eur Heart J, 2014,35(25):1683-1693.
• [10] Sapontis J, Salisbury AC, Yeh RW,et al. Early procedural and health status outcomes after chronic total occlusion angioplasty:A report f rom the OPEN-CTO registry(Outcomes, Patient Health Status, and Efficiency in Chronic Total Occlusion Hybrid Procedures). JACC Cardiovasc Interv,2017, 10(15):1523-1534.
• [11] Jin C, Kim MH, Kim SJ, et al. Predicting successful recanalization in patients with native coronary chronic total occlusion:the Busan CTO Score. Cardiology,2017,137(2):83-91.
• [12] Potter B J, Matteau A, Noiseux N, et al. High stakes:CTO-PCI in the post-CABG patient. Can J Cardiol, 2018, 34(3):238-240.
• [13] Dautov R, Nguyen CM, Altisent O, et al. Recanalization of chronic total occlusions in patients with previous coronary bypass surgery and consideration of retrograde access via saphenous vein grafts. Circ Cardiovasc Interv, 2016,9(7):e003515.