CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

双重抗血小板治疗持续时间

Abstract

Recommended Article

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 Rivaroxaban Plus Aspirin Versus Aspirin in Relation to Vascular Risk in the COMPASS Trial Ticagrelor Monotherapy Versus Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy After PCI: An Individual Patient-Level Meta-Analysis Management of Antithrombotic Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation Patients Undergoing PCI: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Study of Two Dose Regimens of Ticagrelor Compared with Clopidogrel in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Stable Coronary Artery Disease (STEEL-PCI) Updated Expert Consensus Statement on Platelet Function and Genetic Testing for Guiding P2Y12 Receptor Inhibitor Treatment in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ACC/AHA Versus ESC Guidelines on Dual Antiplatelet Therapy JACC Guideline Comparison: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

Clinical Trial2015 Dec;11(8):856-9.

JOURNAL:EuroIntervention. Article Link

Long-term outcomes of routine versus provisional T-stenting for de novo coronary bifurcation lesions: five-year results of the Bifurcations Bad Krozingen I study

Ferenc M, Ayoub M, Büttner HJ et al. Keywords: bifurcation stenting; routine T-stenting; provisional T-stenting; outcome

ABSTRACT


AIMS - Previously, we reported that the nine-month angiographic result after treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions with provisional T-stenting was not significantly different from that with routine T-stenting. To compare long-term clinical outcomes of the two stenting strategies, we extended the follow-up of our study on bifurcation stenting.

 

METHODS AND RESULTS - One hundred and one patients with coronary bifurcation lesions had been randomly assigned to provisional T-stenting and 101 to routine T-stenting, using sirolimus-eluting stents. We performed complete five-year follow-up. The primary efficacy endpoint was the incidence of target lesion revascularisation (TLR), and the primary safety endpoint was the incidence of definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST). We also monitored death, myocardial infarction (MI) and MACE (composite of death, MI and TLR). The cumulative five-year incidence of TLR in the provisional T-stenting arm was not significantly different from that in the routine T-stenting arm (16.2% vs. 16.3%, p=0.97). The same was true for MACE (22.8% vs. 22.9%, p=0.91), the composite of death and MI (9.9% vs. 13.9%, p=0.40), and ST (2.0% vs. 5.1%; p=0.25).

 

CONCLUSIONS - During five-year follow-up, routine T-stenting offered no advantage over provisional T-stenting with respect to TLR or MACE. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00288535