CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Diagnosis and Prognosis of Coronary Artery Disease with SPECT and PET Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds Versus Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stents Canadian spontaneous coronary artery dissection cohort study: in-hospital and 30-day outcomes Nonculprit Lesion Myocardial Infarction Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome Anatomical plaque and vessel characteristics are associated with hemodynamic indices including fractional flow reserve and coronary flow reserve: A prospective exploratory intravascular ultrasound analysis Optical coherence tomography findings: insights from the “randomised multicentre trial investigating angiographic outcomes of hybrid sirolimus-eluting stents with biodegradable polymer compared with everolimus-eluting stents with durable polymer in chronic total occlusions” (PRISON IV) trial Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients Prognostic Implication of Thermodilution Coronary Flow Reserve in Patients Undergoing Fractional Flow Reserve Measurement Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Incidence and prognostic implication of unrecognized myocardial scar characterized by cardiac magnetic resonance in diabetic patients without clinical evidence of myocardial infarction

Clinical Trial2012 Oct 2;60(14):1217-22.

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients treated with everolimus-eluting stents or first-generation Paclitaxel-eluting stents for unprotected left main disease

Valenti R, Migliorini A, Parodi G et al. Keywords: drug-eluting stent(s); everolimus-eluting stent(s); paclitaxel-eluting stent(s)

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - The goal of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients treated with everolimus-eluting stents (EES) with outcomes of patients treated with first-generation paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) for unprotected left main disease (ULMD).


BACKGROUND - No data exist about the comparison of these 2 types of stents in ULMD.

METHODS - The primary endpoint of the study was a 1-year composite of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and stroke (MACE). Secondary endpoints were 1-year target vessel failure (TVF) and 9-month angiographic in-segment restenosis >50%.

RESULTS - From 2004 to 2010, a total of 390 patients underwent ULMD percutaneous coronary intervention (224 received PES and 166 EES). The 1-year MACE rate was 21.9% in the PES group and 10.2% in the EES group (p = 0.002). TVF rate was 20.5% in the PES group and 7.8% in the EES group (p < 0.001). The in-segment restenosis rate was 5.2% in the EES group and 15.6% in the PES group (p = 0.002). EES and EuroSCORE were the only variables related to the risk of MACE. EES (odds ratio: 0.32; p = 0.007) was also independently related to the risk of restenosis.

CONCLUSIONS - EES implantation for ULMD is associated with a reduced incidence of 1-year MACE, TVF, and restenosis as compared with PES implantation.

Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.