CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

左主干支架

科研文章

荐读文献

Two-year outcomes following unprotected left main stenting with first vs new-generation drug-eluting stents: the FINE registry. EuroIntervention. Long-Term Outcomes After PCI or CABG for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease According to Lesion Location Revascularization in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease and Left Ventricular Dysfunction Stroke Rates Following Surgical Versus Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization Complex PCI procedures: challenges for the interventional cardiologist Ten-Year All-Cause Death According to Completeness of Revascularization in Patients With Three-Vessel Disease or Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Insights From the SYNTAX Extended Survival Study Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials Comparison of Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Native Coronary Arteries Versus on Saphenous Venous Aorta Coronary Conduits in Patients With Low Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Impella Device Implantation Achieved or Attempted (from the PROTECT II Randomized Trial and the cVAD Registry) Clinical Outcome After DK Crush Versus Culotte Stenting of Distal Left Main Bifurcation Lesions: The 3-Year Follow-Up Results of the DKCRUSH-III Study Expansion or contraction of stenting in coronary artery disease?
|<<... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ...>>|

Original Research2013 Nov;9(7):809-16.

JOURNAL：EuroIntervention. Article Link

Two-year outcomes following unprotected left main stenting with first vs new-generation drug-eluting stents: the FINE registry. EuroIntervention.

Buchanan GL, Chieffo A, Colombo A et al. Keywords: rug-eluting stents; PCI; unprotected left main

ABSTRACT

AIMS - To assess two-year outcomes following first vs. new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in unprotected left main (ULMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention.


METHODS AND RESULTS - All eligible patients from our two-centre registry treated with first and new-generation DES from October 2006 to November 2010 were analysed. The study objective was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as all-cause mortality, target vessel revascularisation (TVR) and myocardial infarction (MI) at two years. In total, 186 patients were included: 93 (50.0%) treated with first vs. 93 (50.0%) with new-generation DES. No differences were observed in baseline clinical characteristics except for higher EuroSCORE with new-generation DES (3.6±2.5 vs. 4.6±2.7; p=0.007). No significant difference was observed in stenting techniques; two stents were used respectively in 53.8% vs. 44.1% (p=0.187). Notably, intravascular ultrasound guidance was more frequent with new-generation DES (46.2% vs. 61.3%; p=0.040). At 730.0 (interquartile range 365.5-1,224.5) days, there was a trend towards improved MACE with new-generation DES (31.2% vs. 19.6%; p=0.070) and a significant reduction in TVR (23.7% vs. 12.0%; p=0.038) and MI (4.3% vs. 0%; p=0.044). Notably, there were four cases of definite stent thrombosis (ST) with first vs. none with new-generation DES (p=0.044).

CONCLUSIONS - In our study, new-generation DES had a trend for less MACE and improved results with regard to MI, TVR and definite ST at two-year follow-up.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 注册

> CBS 2019 会议日程

> CBS 2019 学术征集

> CBS 2019 热点

 CBSMD

> CBSMD 网站注册

> 教育中心

> 荐读文献

> Top 10 阅读文献

> 文献导读
CBS 2019 CBS 2019 主席团 教育中心 科研动态
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top