CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Prognostic and Practical Validation of Current Definitions of Myocardial Infarction Associated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Circulating MicroRNAs and Monocyte-Platelet Aggregate Formation in Acute Coronary Syndrome Hemodynamic Response to Nitroprusside in Patients With Low-Gradient Severe Aortic Stenosis and Preserved Ejection Fraction Contemporary use of drug-coated balloons in coronary artery disease: Where are we now? Deficiency of GATA3-Positive Macrophages Improves Cardiac Function Following Myocardial Infarction or Pressure Overload Hypertrophy Impact of tissue protrusion after coronary stenting in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients with Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines Effect of Pre-Hospital Crushed Prasugrel Tablets in Patients with STEMI Planned for Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Randomized COMPARE CRUSH Trial Association between Coronary Collaterals and Myocardial Viability in Patients with a Chronic Total Occlusion 中国肺高血压诊断和治疗指南2018

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.