CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

DAPT Duration

Abstract

Recommended Article

Patient-oriented composite endpoints and net adverse clinical events with ticagrelor monotherapy following percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the randomized GLOBAL LEADERS trial Antibody-Based Ticagrelor Reversal Agent in Healthy Volunteers Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration: Reconciling the Inconsistencies Dual Antithrombotic Therapy with Dabigatran after PCI in Atrial Fibrillation Prevention of Bleeding in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing PCI Dual Antiplatelet TherapyIs It Time to Cut the Cord With Aspirin? ACC/AHA Versus ESC Guidelines on Dual Antiplatelet Therapy JACC Guideline Comparison: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Causes, Timing, and Impact of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Interruption for Surgery (from the Patterns of Non-adherence to Anti-platelet Regimens In Stented Patients Registry)
|<< 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 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top