CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

急性冠脉综合征

Abstract

Recommended Article

Impact of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion in Non-Infarct-Related Arteries in Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction (from the COREA-AMI Registry) Prevalence of Coronary Vasospasm Using Coronary Reactivity Testing in Patients With Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection 4-Step Protocol for Disparities in STEMI Care and Outcomes in Women Triage Considerations for Patients Referred for Structural Heart Disease Intervention During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An ACC /SCAI Consensus Statement Early Natural History of Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection Radial versus femoral access and bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in invasively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome (MATRIX): final 1-year results of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial Utility and Challenges of an Early Invasive Strategy in Patients Resuscitated From Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Effect of Pre-Hospital Crushed Prasugrel Tablets in Patients with STEMI Planned for Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The Randomized COMPARE CRUSH Trial
|<<... 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ...>>|

Clinical Trial2018 Jul 7;39(26):2484-2493.

JOURNAL：Eur Heart J. Article Link

A randomized multicentre trial to compare revascularization with optimal medical therapy for the treatment of chronic total coronary occlusions

Werner GS, Martin-Yuste V, EUROCTO trial investigators. Keywords: Chronic coronary occlusion; Percutaneous transluminal intervention; Optimal medical therapy; Seattle angina questionnaire; EQ-5D

ABSTRACT

AIMS - The clinical value of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic coronary total occlusions (CTOs) is not established by randomized trials. This study should compare the benefit of PCI vs. optimal medical therapy (OMT) on the health status in patients with at least one CTO.


METHOD AND RESULTS - Three hundred and ninety-six patients were enrolled in a prospective randomized, multicentre, open-label, and controlled clinical trial to compare the treatment by PCI with OMT with a 2:1 randomization ratio. The primary endpoint was the change in health status assessed by the Seattle angina questionnaire (SAQ) between baseline and 12 months follow-up. Fifty-two percent of patients have multi-vessel disease in whom all significant non-occlusive lesions were treated before randomization. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed including 13.4% failed procedures in the PCI group and 7.3% cross-overs in the OMT group. At 12 months, a greater improvement of SAQ subscales was observed with PCI as compared with OMT for angina frequency [5.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.75; 8.71; P = 0.003], and quality of life (6.62, 95% CI 1.78-11.46; P = 0.007), reaching the prespecified significance level of 0.01 for the primary endpoint. Physical limitation (P = 0.02) was also improved in the PCI group. Complete freedom from angina was more frequent with PCI 71.6% than OMT 57.8% (P = 0.008). There was no periprocedural death or myocardial infarction. At 12 months, major adverse cardiac events were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION - Percutaneous coronary intervention leads to a significant improvement of the health status in patients with stable angina and a CTO as compared with OMT alone.

TRIAL REGISTRATION - NCT01760083.
>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