CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Bifurcation Stenting

Abstract

Recommended Article

Impact of the complexity of bifurcation lesions treated with drug-eluting stents: the DEFINITION study (Definitions and impact of complEx biFurcation lesIons on clinical outcomes after percutaNeous coronary IntervenTIOn using drug-eluting steNts) Three-Year Outcomes of the DKCRUSH-V Trial Comparing DK Crush With Provisional Stenting for Left Main Bifurcation Lesions Double kissing crush in left main coronary bifurcation lesions: A crushing blow to the rival stenting techniques Classic crush and DK crush stenting techniques Contemporary techniques in percutaneous coronary intervention for bifurcation lesions Culotte stenting vs. TAP stenting for treatment of de-novo coronary bifurcation lesions with the need for side-branch stenting: the Bifurcations Bad Krozingen (BBK) II angiographic trial Optimal Fluoroscopic Projections of Coronary Ostia and Bifurcations Defined by Computed Tomographic Coronary Angiography Treatment effects of systematic two-stent and provisional stenting techniques in patients with complex coronary bifurcation lesions: rationale and design of a prospective, randomised and multicentre DEFINITION II trial

Clinical TrialVolume 72, Issue 6, August 2018

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Ranolazine in High-Risk Patients With Implanted Cardioverter-Defibrillators - The RAID Trial

W Zareba, JP Daubert, CA Beck et al. Keywords: implantable cardioverter-defibrillator; ranolazine; ventricular fibrillation; ventricular tachycardia

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - Ventricular tachycardia (VT) and ventricular fibrillation (VF) remain a challenging problem in patients with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs).


OBJECTIVES - This study aimed to determine whether ranolazine administration decreases the likelihood of VT, VF, or death in patients with an ICD.

METHODS - This was double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial in which high-risk ICD patients with ischemic or nonischemic cardiomyopathy were randomized to 1,000 mg ranolazine twice a day or placebo. The primary endpoint was VT or VF requiring appropriate ICD therapy or death, whichever occurred first. Pre-specified secondary endpoints included ICD shock for VT, VF, or death and recurrent VT or VF requiring ICD therapy.

RESULTS - Among 1,012 ICD patients (510 randomized to ranolazine and 502 to placebo) the mean age was 64 ± 10 years and 18% were women. During 28 ± 16 months of follow-up there were 372 (37%) patients with primary endpoint, 270 (27%) patients with VT or VF, and 148 (15%) deaths. The blinded study drug was discontinued in 199 (39.6%) patients receiving placebo and in 253 (49.6%) patients receiving ranolazine (p = 0.001). The hazard ratio for ranolazine versus placebo was 0.84 (95% confidence interval: 0.67 to 1.05; p = 0.117) for VT, VF, or death. In a pre-specified secondary analysis, patients randomized to ranolazine had a marginally significant lower risk of ICD therapies for recurrent VT or VF (hazard ratio: 0.70; 95% confidence interval: 0.51 to 0.96; p = 0.028). There were no other significant treatment effects in other pre-specified secondary analyses, which included individual components of the primary endpoint, inappropriate shocks, cardiac hospitalizations, and quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS - In high-risk ICD patients, treatment with ranolazine did not significantly reduce the incidence of the first VT or VF, or death. However, the study was underpowered to detect a difference in the primary endpoint. In prespecified secondary endpoint analyses, ranolazine administration was associated with a significant reduction in recurrent VT or VF requiring ICD therapy without evidence for increased mortality. (Ranolazine Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Trial [RAID]; NCT01215253)