CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Quantitative angiography methods for bifurcation lesions: a consensus statement update from the European Bifurcation Club IVUS Guidance Is Associated With Better Outcome in Patients Undergoing Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenting Compared With Angiography Guidance Alone Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction During the COVID-19 Pandemic From Nonclinical Research to Clinical Trials and Patient-registries: Challenges and Opportunities in Biomedical Research High-Risk Coronary Atherosclerosis: Is It the Plaque Burden, the Calcium, the Lipid, or Something Else? HFpEF: From Mechanisms to Therapies Prognostic Effect and Longitudinal Hemodynamic Assessment of Borderline Pulmonary Hypertension Current Interventions for the Left Main Bifurcation Comparative analysis of recurrent events after presentation with an index myocardial infarction or ischaemic stroke Wearable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Therapy for the Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
|<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ...>>|

Clinical Trial2008 Dec;1(3):185-92.

JOURNAL：Circ Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Impact of bifurcation technique on 2-year clinical outcomes in 773 patients with distal unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents

Palmerini T, Marzocchi A, Tamburino C et al.

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Distal unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis represents a technical challenge for interventional cardiologists. In this study, we compared 2-year clinical outcomes of different stenting strategies in patients with distal ULMCA stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents.


METHODS AND RESULTS - The survey promoted by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology on ULMCA stenosis was an observational study on patients with ULMCA stenosis treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. In this study, we selected patients with distal ULMCA stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents. Seven hundred seventy-three patients were eligible for this study: 456 were treated with 1 stent (group 1) and 317 with 2 stents (group 2). The primary end point of the study was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as the occurrence of mortality, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. During a 2-year follow-up, risk-adjusted survival free from MACE was significantly higher in patients in group 1 than in patients in group 2. The propensity-adjusted hazard ratio for the risk of 2-year MACE in patients in group 1 versus group 2 was 0.53 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.76). The propensity-adjusted hazard ratio for the risk of 2-year cardiac mortality and myocardial infarction in patients in group 1 versus group 2 was 0.38 (95% CI, 0.17 to 0.85).

CONCLUSIONS - Compared with the 2-stent technique, the 1-stent technique is associated with a better 2-year MACE-free survival. The stenting strategy is a prognostic factor that should be taken into account when deciding the optimal revascularization treatment.
>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