1221 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 27156201)
1. A randomized comparison of novel bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent and durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndromes: The CENTURY II high risk ACS substudy.
Jiménez VA; Iñiguez A; Baz JA; Valdés M; Ortiz A; Vuilliomenet A; Mainar V; Dudek D; Banai S; Tüller D; Bonnet JL; De Miguel A; Bastos G; Wijns W; Saito S
Cardiovasc Revasc Med; 2016 Sep; 17(6):355-61. PubMed ID: 27156201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Subgroup Analysis Comparing Ultrathin, Bioresorbable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Thin, Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients.
Roguin A; Kandzari DE; Marcusohn E; Koolen JJ; Doros G; Massaro JM; Garcia-Garcia HM; Bennett J; Gharib EG; Cutlip DE; Waksman R
Circ Cardiovasc Interv; 2018 Oct; 11(10):e007331. PubMed ID: 30354631
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparison of long-term clinical outcomes in multivessel coronary artery disease patients treated either with bioresoarbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent or permanent polymer everolimus-eluting stent: 5-year results of the CENTURY II randomized clinical trial.
Iñiguez A; Chevalier B; Richardt G; Neylon A; Jiménez VA; Kornowski R; Carrie D; Moreno R; Barbato E; Serra-Peñaranda A; Guiducci V; Valdés-Chávarri M; Yajima J; Wijns W; Saito S;
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2020 Feb; 95(2):175-184. PubMed ID: 31033154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable-Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: 2-Year Results of the BIOSCIENCE Trial.
Zbinden R; Piccolo R; Heg D; Roffi M; Kurz DJ; Muller O; Vuilliomenet A; Cook S; Weilenmann D; Kaiser C; Jamshidi P; Franzone A; Eberli F; Jüni P; Windecker S; Pilgrim T
J Am Heart Assoc; 2016 Mar; 5(3):e003255. PubMed ID: 26979080
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The Pt-Cr everolimus-eluting stent with bioabsorbable polymer in the treatment of patients with acute coronary syndromes. Results from the SYNERGY ACS registry.
de la Torre Hernandez JM; Moreno R; Gonzalo N; Rivera R; Linares JA; Veiga Fernandez G; Gomez Menchero A; Garcia Del Blanco B; Hernandez F; Benito Gonzalez T; Subinas A; Escaned J
Cardiovasc Revasc Med; 2019 Aug; 20(8):705-710. PubMed ID: 30414798
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of sirolimus eluting stent with bioresorbable polymer to everolimus eluting stent with permanent polymer in bifurcation lesions: Results from CENTURY II trial.
Orvin K; Carrie D; Richardt G; Desmet W; Assali A; Werner G; Ikari Y; Fujii K; Goicolea J; Dangoisse V; Manari A; Saito S; Wijns W; Kornowski R
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2016 May; 87(6):1092-100. PubMed ID: 26268482
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Randomized Multicenter Trial Investigating Angiographic Outcomes of Hybrid Sirolimus-Eluting Stents With Biodegradable Polymer Compared With Everolimus-Eluting Stents With Durable Polymer in Chronic Total Occlusions: The PRISON IV Trial.
Teeuwen K; van der Schaaf RJ; Adriaenssens T; Koolen JJ; Smits PC; Henriques JP; Vermeersch PH; Tjon Joe Gin RM; Schölzel BE; Kelder JC; Tijssen JG; Agostoni P; Suttorp MJ
JACC Cardiovasc Interv; 2017 Jan; 10(2):133-143. PubMed ID: 28104206
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Effect of Post-Dilatation Following Primary PCI With Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold Versus Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stent Implantation: An Angiographic and Optical Coherence Tomography TROFI II Substudy.
Yamaji K; Brugaletta S; Sabaté M; Iñiguez A; Jensen LO; Cequier A; Hofma SH; Christiansen EH; Suttorp M; van Es GA; Sotomi Y; Onuma Y; Serruys PW; Windecker S; Räber L
JACC Cardiovasc Interv; 2017 Sep; 10(18):1867-1877. PubMed ID: 28935079
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Biodegradable Polymer Biolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: Final 5-Year Report From the COMPARE II Trial (Abluminal Biodegradable Polymer Biolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent).
Vlachojannis GJ; Smits PC; Hofma SH; Togni M; Vázquez N; Valdés M; Voudris V; Slagboom T; Goy JJ; den Heijer P; van der Ent M
JACC Cardiovasc Interv; 2017 Jun; 10(12):1215-1221. PubMed ID: 28579236
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting coronary stent compared with permanent polymer everolimus-eluting coronary stent implantation for treatment of small vessel coronary artery disease: CENTURY II trial.
Wöhrle J; Markovic S; Rottbauer W; Muramatsu T; Kadota K; Vázquez-González N; Odenstedt J; Serra A; Antoniucci D; Varenne O; Saito S; Wijns W
EuroIntervention; 2016 Jun; 12(2):e167-74. PubMed ID: 27290676
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. A randomised comparison of a novel abluminal groove-filled biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent with a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent: clinical and angiographic follow-up of the TARGET I trial.
Gao RL; Xu B; Lansky AJ; Yang YJ; Ma CS; Han YL; Chen SL; Li H; Zhang RY; Fu GS; Yuan ZY; Jiang H; Huo Y; Li W; Zhang YJ; Leon MB;
EuroIntervention; 2013 May; 9(1):75-83. PubMed ID: 23685298
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Ten-Year Clinical Outcomes From a Trial of Three Limus-Eluting Stents With Different Polymer Coatings in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease.
Kufner S; Joner M; Thannheimer A; Hoppmann P; Ibrahim T; Mayer K; Cassese S; Laugwitz KL; Schunkert H; Kastrati A; Byrne RA;
Circulation; 2019 Jan; 139(3):325-333. PubMed ID: 30586724
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A randomized, prospective, intercontinental evaluation of a bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting coronary stent system: the CENTURY II (Clinical Evaluation of New Terumo Drug-Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients with Coronary Artery Disease) trial.
Saito S; Valdes-Chavarri M; Richardt G; Moreno R; Iniguez Romo A; Barbato E; Carrie D; Ando K; Merkely B; Kornowski R; Eltchaninoff H; James S; Wijns W;
Eur Heart J; 2014 Aug; 35(30):2021-31. PubMed ID: 24847155
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Ultrathin Bioresorbable-Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Thin Durable-Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization: 3-Year Outcomes From the Randomized BIOFLOW V Trial.
Kandzari DE; Koolen JJ; Doros G; Garcia-Garcia HM; Bennett J; Roguin A; Gharib EG; Cutlip DE; Waksman R;
JACC Cardiovasc Interv; 2020 Jun; 13(11):1343-1353. PubMed ID: 32499026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 5-year results of a randomized comparison of XIENCE V everolimus-eluting and TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stents: final results from the SPIRIT III trial (clinical evaluation of the XIENCE V everolimus eluting coronary stent system in the treatment of patients with de novo native coronary artery lesions).
Gada H; Kirtane AJ; Newman W; Sanz M; Hermiller JB; Mahaffey KW; Cutlip DE; Sudhir K; Hou L; Koo K; Stone GW
JACC Cardiovasc Interv; 2013 Dec; 6(12):1263-6. PubMed ID: 24239202
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Improved safety and reduction in stent thrombosis associated with biodegradable polymer-based biolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer-based sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease: final 5-year report of the LEADERS (Limus Eluted From A Durable Versus ERodable Stent Coating) randomized, noninferiority trial.
Serruys PW; Farooq V; Kalesan B; de Vries T; Buszman P; Linke A; Ischinger T; Klauss V; Eberli F; Wijns W; Morice MC; Di Mario C; Corti R; Antoni D; Sohn HY; Eerdmans P; Rademaker-Havinga T; van Es GA; Meier B; Jüni P; Windecker S
JACC Cardiovasc Interv; 2013 Aug; 6(8):777-89. PubMed ID: 23968698
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Unselected Use of Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Coronary Revascularization.
Yamaji K; Zanchin T; Zanchin C; Stortecky S; Koskinas KC; Hunziker L; Praz F; Blöchlinger S; Moro C; Moschovitis A; Seiler C; Valgimigli M; Billinger M; Pilgrim T; Heg D; Windecker S; Räber L
Circ Cardiovasc Interv; 2018 Sep; 11(9):e006741. PubMed ID: 30354590
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of Ultrathin, Bioresorbable-Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents and Thin, Durable-Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Calcified or Small Vessel Lesions.
Dan K; Garcia-Garcia HM; Kolm P; Windecker S; Saito S; Kandzari DE; Waksman R
Circ Cardiovasc Interv; 2020 Sep; 13(9):e009189. PubMed ID: 32895004
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold versus everolimus-eluting metallic stent in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: 1-year results of a propensity score matching comparison: the BVS-EXAMINATION Study (bioresorbable vascular scaffold-a clinical evaluation of everolimus eluting coronary stents in the treatment of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction).
Brugaletta S; Gori T; Low AF; Tousek P; Pinar E; Gomez-Lara J; Scalone G; Schulz E; Chan MY; Kocka V; Hurtado J; Gomez-Hospital JA; Münzel T; Lee CH; Cequier A; Valdés M; Widimsky P; Serruys PW; Sabaté M
JACC Cardiovasc Interv; 2015 Jan; 8(1 Pt B):189-197. PubMed ID: 25616924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Vascular response to bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent vs. permanent polymer everolimus-eluting stent at 9-month follow-up: an optical coherence tomography sub-study from the CENTURY II trial.
Kuramitsu S; Kazuno Y; Sonoda S; Domei T; Jinnouchi H; Yamaji K; Soga Y; Shirai S; Ando K; Saito S
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging; 2016 Jan; 17(1):34-40. PubMed ID: 26333375
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
