CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Readmissions Where Are the Solutions? Know Diabetes by Heart: A Partnership to Improve Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Multivessel PCI Guided by FFR or Angiography for Myocardial Infarction Lack of Association Between Heart Failure and Incident Cancer Imaging Coronary Anatomy and Reducing Myocardial Infarction Open sesame technique in percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction Deficiency of GATA3-Positive Macrophages Improves Cardiac Function Following Myocardial Infarction or Pressure Overload Hypertrophy High-Sensitivity Troponin and The Application of Risk Stratification Thresholds in Patients with Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome Fractional flow reserve vs. angiography in guiding management to optimize outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation FAMOUS-NSTEMI randomized trial Optimal medical therapy vs. coronary revascularization for patients presenting with chronic total occlusion: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score adjusted studies
|<<... 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 ...>>|

Clinical Trial2020 Nov 3;EIJ-D-20-00556.

JOURNAL：Eurointervention. Article Link

A randomized comparison of Coronary Stents according to Short or Prolonged durations of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes: a pre-specified analysis of the SMART-DATE trial

WJ Jang, JB Lee, YB Song et al. Keywords: 6-month vs. 12-month DAPT; ACS; DES

ABSTRACT

AIMS - We sought to compare biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stents(BP-BES) with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting(DP-EES) and zotarolimus-eluting stents(DP-ZES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome(ACS) according to different duration of dual antiplatelet therapy(DAPT).


METHODS AND RESULTS - In the SMART-DATE trial, 2712 patients with ACS underwent randomization for allocation of DAPT (6-month [n=1357] or 12-month or longer [n=1355]) and type of stents (BP-BES [n=901]), DP-EES [n=904], or DP-ZES [n=907]). At 18 months, primary endpoint (a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis) was 2.6% with BP-BES, 2.0% with DP-EES, and 2.1% with DP-ZES (HR 1.29, 95% CI 0.70-2.39, p=0.42 for BP-BES vs. DP-EES and HR 1.23, 95% CI 0.67-2.26, p=0.50 for BP-BES vs. DP-ZES). The treatment effect of BP-BES for the primary endpoint was consistent among patients receiving 6-month DAPT as well as those receiving 12-month or longer DAPT (BP-BES vs. DP-EES, pinteraction=0.48 and BP-BES vs. DP-ZES, pinteraction=0.87). After excluding 179 patients (101 in the BP-BES group) who did not receive allocated DES, per-protocol analysis showed similar results.


CONCLUSIONS - The risk of a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis was not significantly different between patients receiving BP-BES vs. DP-EES or DP-ZES across short or prolonged duration of DAPT after ACS.
>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