These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Clinical outcomes after multilesion percutaneous coronary intervention: comparison between exclusive and selective use of drug-eluting stents.
    Author: Bertrand OF, Faurie B, Larose E, Nguyen CM, Gleeton O, Déry JP, Noël B, Proulx G, Roy L, Costerousse O, De Larochellière R, Rodés-Cabau J.
    Journal: J Invasive Cardiol; 2008 Mar; 20(3):99-104. PubMed ID: 18316823.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: This study compared acute and late outcomes following a strategy of selective drug-eluting stent (DES) use guided by a set of 4 criteria defining higher risk of in-stent restenosis compared to an exclusive DES strategy in 362 patients with multilesion (n = 900) percutaneous coronary interventions. RESULTS: At a mean follow up of 412 +/- 110 days, major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, revascularization) were 16.8% in the exclusive DES group compared to 18.4% in the selective DES group (p = 0.78). By univariate analysis, revascularization rates (9.9% in the exclusive DES group versus 10.5% in the selective DES group; p = 1.0) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) rates (5.5% versus 6.2%; p = 0.77) were similar in the 2 groups. By multivariate analysis adjusted by propensity score to account for differences in baseline characteristics, the strategy of exclusive DES use was not associated with lower risks of revascularization (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-1.29) or TLR (HR: 0.81, 95% CI 0.59-1.08) compared with selective DES use. Using the Academic Research Consortium criteria, stent thrombosis occurred in 6/161 (3.7%) cases in the exclusive DES group and in 1/201 (0.5%) case in the selective DES group (p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with multiple coronary lesions, a selective DES strategy for lesions at higher risk of restenosis and bare-metal stents for other lesions was safe and effective when compared to the exclusive use of DES. A large, prospective, randomized trial is required to validate a criteria-based selective DES strategy compared to systematic DES use.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]