JACC. Cardiovascular interventions
-
JACC Cardiovasc Interv · Feb 2012
Timing of angiography with a routine invasive strategy and long-term outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: a collaborative analysis of individual patient data from the FRISC II (Fragmin and Fast Revascularization During Instability in Coronary Artery Disease), ICTUS (Invasive Versus Conservative Treatment in Unstable Coronary Syndromes), and RITA-3 (Intervention Versus Conservative Treatment Strategy in Patients With Unstable Angina or Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction) Trials.
This study sought to investigate long-term outcomes after early or delayed angiography in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (nSTE-ACS) undergoing a routine invasive management. ⋯ In the FIR database of patients presenting with nSTE-ACS, the timing of angiography was not related to long-term cardiovascular mortality or myocardial infarction. (Invasive Versus Conservative Treatment in Unstable Coronary Syndromes [ICTUS]; ISRCTN82153174. Intervention Versus Conservative Treatment Strategy in Patients With Unstable Angina or Non-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction [the Third Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina Trials (RITA-3)]; ISRCTN07752711).
-
JACC Cardiovasc Interv · Dec 2011
30-day readmission for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions in New York state.
This study sought to report percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) 30-day readmission rates, identify the impact of staged (planned) readmissions on overall readmission rates, determine the significant predictors of unstaged readmissions after PCI, and specify the reasons for readmissions. ⋯ Future efforts to reduce readmissions should be directed toward the recognition of patients most at risk, and the reasons they are readmitted. Staging also should be examined from a cost-effectiveness standpoint as a function of patients' unique risk factors.
-
JACC Cardiovasc Interv · Nov 2011
Meta AnalysisImpact of lesion length and vessel size on clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention with everolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stents pooled analysis from the SPIRIT (Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System) and COMPARE (Second-generation everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in real-life practice) Randomized Trials.
The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of reference vessel diameter (RVD) and lesion length (LL) on the relative safety and efficacy of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES). ⋯ Patients with short lesions in large vessels have low rates of MACE at 2 years after treatment with either EES or PES. In higher-risk patients with long lesions and/or small vessels, EES results in significant improvements in both clinical safety and efficacy outcomes. (A Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients With de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions; NCT00180310; SPIRIT III: A Clinical Evaluation of the Investigational Device XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System [EECSS] in the Treatment of Subjects With de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions; NCT00180479; SPIRIT IV Clinical Trial: Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects With de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions; NCT00307047; A Randomized Controlled Trial of Everolimus-eluting Stents and Paclitaxel-eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization in Daily Practice: The COMPARE Trial; NCT01016041).
-
JACC Cardiovasc Interv · Nov 2011
Multicenter StudyTranscatheter valve-in-valve implantation using Corevalve Revalving System for failed surgical aortic bioprostheses.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of CoreValve Revalving System (CRS) (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) implantation in patients with failed aortic bioprostheses. ⋯ CRS implantation was feasible and effective regardless of the prevalent mode of failure. This finding may significantly affect the treatment of patients with a failed bioprosthesis deemed at a prohibitive risk for surgical redo.
-
JACC Cardiovasc Interv · Nov 2011
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative StudyFractional flow reserve in unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction experience from the FAME (Fractional flow reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study.
The aim of this study was to study whether there is a difference in benefit of fractional flow reserve (FFR) guidance for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in multivessel coronary disease in patients with unstable angina (UA) or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), compared with stable angina (SA). ⋯ The benefit of using FFR to guide PCI in multivessel disease does not differ between patients with UA or NSTEMI, compared with patients with SA.