CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

Stenting Left Main

科研文章

荐读文献

Surgical ineligibility and mortality among patients with unprotected left main or multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention Patient selection and percutaneous technique of unprotected left main revascularization Comparison of Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Native Coronary Arteries Versus on Saphenous Venous Aorta Coronary Conduits in Patients With Low Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction and Impella Device Implantation Achieved or Attempted (from the PROTECT II Randomized Trial and the cVAD Registry) Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Left Main and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Do We Have the Evidence? Two-year outcomes following unprotected left main stenting with first vs new-generation drug-eluting stents: the FINE registry. EuroIntervention. Incidence and Management of Restenosis After Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Disease With Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents (from Failure in Left Main Study With 2nd Generation Stents-Cardiogroup III Study) Management of left main disease: an update Stroke Rates Following Surgical Versus Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization Everolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis. The PRECOMBAT-2 (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) study Randomized Trial of Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: 5-Year Outcomes of the PRECOMBAT Study
|<<... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ...>>|

Editorial2019 Oct 12;394(10206):1299-1300.

JOURNAL：Lancet. Article Link

Expansion or contraction of stenting in coronary artery disease?

Taggart DP, Pagano D. Keywords: PCI vs CABG; left main

ABSTRACT

In the past four decades, more than 20 trials of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) have tested whether iterative technical advances in PCI have made it as effective as CABG in patients with stable coronary artery disease. The clinical relevance of most of these trials to real-world practice has, however, been plagued by three issues.


First, by largely enrolling highly selected patients with low-severity coronary artery disease, the trials were inherently biased towards more favourable outcomes for PCI. Second, by limiting follow-up to a few years, the trials hid the accelerating divergence in survival benefit of CABG. Third, even in relatively contemporary trials, surgical patients received substantially inferior medical therapy, thereby mitigating the overall benefits of CABG. 
>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