Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions
-
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv · Jan 2013
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative StudyFive-year clinical outcomes of a polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stent versus a permanent polymer paclitaxel-eluting stent: final results of the intracoronary stenting and angiographic restenosis - test equivalence between two drug-eluting stents (ISAR-TEST) trial.
Limited evidence exists regarding the long-term performance of polymer-free (PF) drug-eluting stents (DES) in comparison to permanent polymer DES. This study investigated the 5-year efficacy and safety of a PF sirolimus-eluting stent (PF-SES) versus a permanent polymer paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in the setting of the Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Restenosis-Test Equivalence Between Two Drug-Eluting Stents (ISAR-TEST) randomized trial. ⋯ Overall there was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between PF-SES and PES to 5 years. Extended follow-up supports the durability of efficacy and safety of PF-SES.
-
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv · Jan 2013
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative StudyRosuvastatin pretreatment in patients undergoing elective PCI to reduce the incidence of myocardial periprocedural necrosis: the ROMA trial.
The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of the high-dose rosuvastatin preadministration in reducing periprocedural myocardial necrosis and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). ⋯ High loading dose of rosuvastatin within 24 hr before elective PCI seems to decrease the incidence of periprocedural myocardial necrosis during a period of 12-months compared to the standard treatment.
-
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv · Dec 2012
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative StudyA multicenter randomized comparison of drug-eluting balloon plus bare-metal stent versus bare-metal stent versus drug-eluting stent in bifurcation lesions treated with a single-stenting technique: six-month angiographic and 12-month clinical results of the drug-eluting balloon in bifurcations trial.
Percutaneous treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions remains hampered by suboptimal results, mainly in the side branch (SB), even with the use of drug-eluting stents (DES). Paclitaxel drug-eluting balloons (DEB) could provide an attractive alternative to treat bifurcations in combination with a provisional T-stenting technique in order to minimize SB restenosis. We compared angiographic and clinical outcomes of a provisional T-stenting technique with a DEB plus bare-metal stent (BMS) versus BMS versus paclitaxel DES. ⋯ Pretreatment of both MB and SB with DEB failed to show angiographic and clinical superiority over conventional BMS, using a provisional T-stenting technique. Moreover DES showed superior angiographic results than DEB and BMS.
-
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv · Nov 2012
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter StudyEarly statin treatment prior to primary PCI for acute myocardial infarction: REPERATOR, a randomized placebo-controlled pilot trial.
The aim of this pilot study was to determine whether early atorvastatin treatment will reduce left ventricle (LV) remodeling, infarct size, and improve microvascular perfusion. ⋯ In this pilot study, pretreatment with atorvastatin in an acute myocardial infarction does not result in an improved cardiac function, microvascular perfusion, or decreased myocardial infarct size.
-
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv · Sep 2012
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative StudyRandomized comparison of cost-saving and effectiveness of oral rapamycin plus bare-metal stents with drug-eluting stents: three-year outcome from the randomized oral rapamycin in Argentina (ORAR) III trial.
The Oral Rapamycin in ARgentina (ORAR) III trial is a randomized study comparing a strategy of oral rapamycin (OR) plus bare-metal stent (BMS) versus a strategy of drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with de novo coronary lesions. The purpose of this study was to assess the 3 years cost-effectiveness outcome of each strategy. ⋯ At 3 years follow-up, there were no differences in effectiveness between the two strategies, and DES strategy was not more cost-effective as compared to OR plus BMS.