CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Incidence of contrast-induced acute kidney injury in a large cohort of all-comers undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Comparison of five contrast media Precisely Tuned Inhibition of HIF Prolyl Hydroxylases Is Key for Cardioprotection After Ischemia 2-Year Outcomes After Stenting of Lipid-Rich and Nonrich Coronary Plaques Successful catheter ablation of electrical storm after myocardial infarction Optimal Stenting Technique for Complex Coronary Lesions Intracoronary Imaging-Guided Pre-Dilation, Stent Sizing, and Post-Dilation When high‐volume PCI operators in high‐volume hospitals move to lower volume hospitals—Do they still maintain high volume and quality of outcomes? Development and validation of a simple risk score to predict 30-day readmission after percutaneous coronary intervention in a cohort of medicare patients Efficacy and safety of rosuvastatin vs. atorvastatin in lowering LDL cholesterol : A meta-analysis of trials with East Asian populations Association Between Haptoglobin Phenotype and Microvascular Obstruction in Patients With STEMI: A Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Study Advances in Coronary No-Reflow Phenomenon-a Contemporary Review
|<<... 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 ...>>|

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.
>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