CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

双重抗血小板治疗持续时间

科研文章

荐读文献

Adjunctive Cilostazol to Dual Antiplatelet Therapy to Enhance Mobilization of Endothelial Progenitor Cell in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled EPISODE Trial Six Versus 12 Months of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Implantation of Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent: Randomized Substudy of the I-LOVE-IT 2 Trial Twelve or 30 months of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stents Short- versus long-term duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy after coronary stenting: a randomized multicenter trial Major Bleeding Rates in Atrial Fibrillation Patients on Single, Dual, or Triple Antithrombotic Therapy Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration: Reconciling the Inconsistencies Six-month versus 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy after implantation of drug-eluting stents: the Efficacy of Xience/Promus Versus Cypher to Reduce Late Loss After Stenting (EXCELLENT) randomized, multicenter study A new strategy for discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy: the RESET Trial (REal Safety and Efficacy of 3-month dual antiplatelet Therapy following Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent implantation) Dual-antiplatelet treatment beyond 1 year after drug-eluting stent implantation (ARCTIC-Interruption): a randomised trial Use of clopidogrel with or without aspirin in patients taking oral anticoagulant therapy and undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: an open-label, randomised, controlled trial

Original Research2005 Feb 1;45(3):351-6.

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: comparison with bare metal stent implantation

Park SJ, Kim YH, Lee BK et al. Keywords: Sirolimus-eluting stent; unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis; bare metal stent

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVESThis study was designed to compare the clinical and angiographic outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and bare metal stent (BMS) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis.


BACKGROUNDThe safety and effectiveness of SES implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis have not been ascertained.

METHODSElective SES implantation for de novo unprotected LMCA stenosis was performed in 102 consecutive patients with preserved left ventricular function from March 2003 to March 2004. Data from this group were compared to those from 121 patients treated with BMS during the preceding two years.

RESULTSCompared to the BMS group, the SES group received more direct stenting, had fewer debulking atherectomies, had a greater number of stents, had more segments stented, and underwent more bifurcation stenting. The procedural success rate was 100% for both groups. There were no incidents of death, stent thrombosis, Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI), or emergent bypass surgery during hospitalization in either group. Despite less acute gain (2.06 +/- 0.56 mm vs. 2.73 +/- 0.73 mm, p < 0.001) in the SES group, SES patients showed a lower late lumen loss (0.05 +/- 0.57 mm vs. 1.27 +/- 0.90 mm, p < 0.001) and a lower six-month angiographic restenosis rate (7.0% vs. 30.3%, p < 0.001) versus the BMS group. At 12 months, the rate of freedom from death, MI, and target lesion revascularization was 98.0 +/- 1.4% in the SES group and 81.4 +/- 3.7% in the BMS group (p = 0.0003).

CONCLUSIONSSirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis appears safe with regard to acute and midterm complications and is more effective in preventing restenosis compared to BMS implantation.