CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

推荐文献

科研文章

荐读文献

Classification of Deaths in Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials Known Unknowns and Unknown Unknowns Defining High Bleeding Risk in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Consensus Document From the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk Best Practices for the Prevention of Radial Artery Occlusion After Transradial Diagnostic Angiography and Intervention An International Consensus Paper Coronary flow velocity reserve predicts adverse prognosis in women with angina and noobstructive coronary artery disease: resultsfrom the iPOWER study 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 Older Adults in the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit: Factoring Geriatric Syndromes in the Management, Prognosis, and Process of Care: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Non-invasive detection of coronary inflammation using computed tomography and prediction of residual cardiovascular risk (the CRISP CT study): a post-hoc analysis of prospective outcome data 2020 AHA/ACC Key Data Elements and Definitions for Coronary Revascularization A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Data Standards (Writing Committee to Develop Clinical Data Standards for Coronary Revascularization) A sirolimus-eluting bioabsorbable polymer-coated stent (MiStent) versus an everolimus-eluting durable polymer stent (Xience) after percutaneous coronary intervention (DESSOLVE III): a randomised, single-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial Level of Scientific Evidence Underlying the Current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Clinical Practice Guidelines
|<<... 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 >>|

Clinical Trial2018 Oct 1;268:61-67.

JOURNAL：Int J Cardiol. Article Link

Impact of percutaneous coronary intervention extent, complexity and platelet reactivity on outcomes after drug-eluting stent implantation

Généreux P, Giustino G, Redfors B et al. Keywords: Acute coronary syndromes; Complex percutaneous coronary intervention; Coronary artery disease; Drug-eluting stents; Dual antiplatelet therapy; Stent thrombosis

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - Risk stratification after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is mainly based on demographics and clinical presentation (stable coronary artery disease [CAD] vs. acute coronary syndromes [ACS]). We investigated the impact of PCI extent and complexity on 2-year clinical outcomes after successful implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES) and whether this effect is influenced by clinical presentation and/or high platelet reactivity (HPR) on clopidogrel.


METHODS AND RESULTS - Patients from the prospective, multicenter Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy with Drug-Eluting Stents study were stratified according to PCI complexity, with complex PCI (C-PCI) defined as ≥3 stents implanted, bifurcation PCI with 2 stents, rotational atherectomy use for severely calcified lesions, or left main or saphenous vein graft (SVG) PCI. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE; cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis) were compared at 2-year follow-up in patients with and without C-PCI. Successful DES PCI was performed in 8582 patients-2255 (26.3%) with C-PCI. C-PCI was independently associated with higher 2-year risk of MACE (adjusted HR [adjHR]: 1.56; 95%CI: 1.29-1.89; p<0.0001), MI (adjHR: 1.71; 95%CI: 1.37-2.14; p<0.0001), and ST (adjHR: 2.26; 95%CI: 1.42-3.59; p=0.0006). The association between C-PCI vs. non-C-PCI and the risk of MI and ST was greater in stable CAD than in ACS (Pinteraction=0.04 and 0.03, respectively). SVG PCI, 2-stent bifurcation treatment, and implantation of ≥3 stents were independently associated with MACE.

CONCLUSIONS - Patients undergoing extensive and more complex PCI experienced worse outcomes after successful PCI. Considering the extent and complexity of PCI revascularization may improve risk stratification.

Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.
>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