임상

HOME > 연구실적 > 임상 > 논문
 
작성일 : 24-06-18 08:02
논문번호 282
논문제목(영문) Real-World Three-Year Clinical Outcomes of Biolimus-Eluting Stents versus Other Contemporary Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients: Data from the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR).
국내외구분 국외 SCI여부 SCI(E)
연구책임자역할 공저자
주저자명 Park JY
교신저자명 Rha SW
공동저자명 Noh YK, Choi BG, Hong JY, Choi JW, Ryu SK, Park SH, Kim YH, Jeong MH
게제년월일 2021-07-01
ISSN 0896-4327
Impact Factor 1.34
학술지명 J Interv Cardiol
서지사항 0집 / 0권 / 0호,   페이지(6698582 - 6698582)
요약초록문
(Abstract) 입력		 Introduction: Biolimus-eluting stents (BES) are known to be superior to bare-metal stents. This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of BES compared to other drug-eluting stents (DES) based on big data from the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR).

Methods: The study analyzed a total of 9,759 acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with DES. Total death, cardiac death, recurrent MI, revascularization, stent thrombosis, target lesion failure (TLF, composite of cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE, composite of total death, recurrent MI, and revascularization) were analyzed in patients with AMI up to three years. Study populations were divided into BES (n = 2,020), everolimus-eluting stents (EES, n = 5,293), and zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES, n = 2,446) groups.

Results: To adjust baseline potential confounders, an inverse probability weighting (IPTW) analysis was performed. After IPTW, at three years, total death (7.2%, 8.6%, and 9.5%, P < 0.001), cardiac death (4.1%, 5.3%, and 6.6%, P < 0.001), recurrent MI (1.6%, 2.6%, and 3.2%, P < 0.001), TLF (6.5%, 8.1%, and 9.1%, P < 0.001), and MACE (15.8%, 17.5%, and 18.2%, P < 0.001) were lowest in the BES group compared with the other DES groups in AMI patients. During the 3-year clinical follow-up, the BES group showed better outcomes of MACE (hazard ratio (HR), 0.773; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.676-0.884; P < 0.001), TLF (HR, 0.659; 95% CI, 0.538-0.808; P < 0.001), total death (HR, 0.687; 95% CI, 0.566-0.835; P < 0.001), and cardiac death (HR,0.593; 95% CI, 0.462-0.541; P < 0.001) than the EES groups.
파일  C282.pdf (539.6K) DATE : 2024-06-18 08:02:47