CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

双重抗血小板治疗持续时间

Abstract

Recommended Article

Three vs twelve months of dual antiplatelet therapy after zotarolimus-eluting stents: the OPTIMIZE randomized trial Genotyping to Guide Clopidogrel Treatment: An In-Depth Analysis of the TAILOR-PCI Trial Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy with Clopidogrel Versus Ticagrelor in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Open-label Trial to Compare Efficacy and Safety of Clopidogrel vs. Ticagrelor in Stabilized Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction after Percutan eous Coronary Intervention: rationale and design of the TALOS-AMI trial Osteoarthritis risk is reduced after treatment with ticagrelor compared to clopidogrel: a propensity score matching analysis Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration in Medically Managed Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: Sub-Analysis of the OPT-CAD Study 1-Year Outcomes of Delayed Versus Immediate Intervention in Patients With Transient ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction
|<<... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ...>>|

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

>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