CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

Stenting Left Main

科研文章

荐读文献

One or two stents for the distal Left Main bifurcation The DK crush V study - The DK crush V study Left Main Stenting: What We Have Learnt So Far? Comparison of double kissing crush versus Culotte stenting for unprotected distal left main bifurcation lesions: results from a multicenter, randomized, prospective DKCRUSH-III study The Current State of Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Novel developments in revascularization for left main coronary artery disease Provisional versus elective two-stent strategy for unprotected true left main bifurcation lesions: Insights from a FAILS-2 sub-study Left Main Bifurcation Angioplasty: Are 2 Stents One Too Many? Impact of coronary anatomy and stenting technique on long-term outcome after drug-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery disease 2-year outcomes with the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold for treatment of coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of seven randomised trials with an individual patient data substudy Design and rationale for the treatment effects of provisional side branch stenting and DK crush stenting techniques in patients with unprotected distal left main coronary artery bifurcation lesions (DKCRUSH V) Trial
|<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ...>>|

Original Research2009 Aug 4;120(5):400-7.

JOURNAL：Circulation. Article Link

Long-term safety and effectiveness of unprotected left main coronary stenting with drug-eluting stents compared with bare-metal stents

Kim YH, Park DW, Revascularization for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: Comparison of Percutaneous Coronary Angioplasty Versus Surgical Revascularization Investigators et al. Keywords: drug-eluting stent; Bare-Metal Stent; Unprotected Left Main Coronary Stenting

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND - Limited information is available on long-term outcomes for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease who received drug-eluting stents (DES).


METHODS AND RESULTS - In the multicenter registry evaluating outcomes among patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis undergoing stenting with either bare metal stents (BMS) or DES, 1217 consecutive patients were divided into 2 groups: 353 who received only BMS and 864 who received at least 1 DES. The 3-year outcomes were compared by use of the adjustment of inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighted method. Patients receiving DES were older and had a higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and multivessel disease. In the overall population, with the use of DES, the 3-year adjusted risk of death (8.0% versus 9.5%; hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval, 0.36 to 1.40; P=0.976) or death or myocardial infarction (14.3% versus 14.9%; hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.49 to 1.40; P=0.479) was similar compared with BMS. However, the risk of target lesion revascularization was significantly lower with the use of DES than BMS (5.4% versus 12.1%; hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.22 to 0.73; P=0.003). When patients were classified according to lesion location, DES was still associated with lower risk of target lesion revascularization in patients with bifurcation (6.9% versus 16.3%; hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.18 to 0.78; P=0.009) or nonbifurcation (3.4% versus 10.3%; hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.17 to 0.88; P=0.024) lesions with a comparable risk of death or myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSIONS - Compared with BMS, DES was associated with a reduction in the need for repeat revascularization without increasing the risk of death or myocardial infarction for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis.
>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