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: A novel filter-based distal embolic protection device for percutaneous intervention of saphenous vein graft lesions: results of the AMEthyst randomized controlled trial.
    Author: Kereiakes DJ, Turco MA, Breall J, Farhat NZ, Feldman RL, McLaurin B, Popma JJ, Mauri L, Zimetbaum P, Massaro J, Cutlip DE, AMEthyst Study Investigators.
    Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv; 2008 Jun; 1(3):248-57. PubMed ID: 19463308.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the relative safety and efficacy of the novel Interceptor PLUS Coronary Filter System (Medtronic Vascular, Santa Rosa, California) compared with approved embolic-protection devices (e.g., GuardWire, Medtronic Vascular/FilterWire EZ, Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of degenerative saphenous vein grafts (SVG). BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention of degenerative SVG is associated with embolization of atherothrombotic debris and subsequent myocardial infarction in a significant portion of patients. The use of distal embolic-protection devices has previously been demonstrated to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events associated with PCI in these patients. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized noninferiority trial, 797 patients undergoing PCI with stenting of SVG stenoses (de novo or restenotic) with reference vessel diameter 2.5 mm to 5.25 mm were randomly assigned 2:1 to either the Interceptor PLUS (n = 533) or control distal-protection devices (GuardWire [n = 191], FilterWire EZ [n = 73]) at the physician's discretion. RESULTS: The trial primary clinical end point (composite occurrence of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent repeat revascularization through 30 days) was observed in 8% and 7.3% of Interceptor and control-treated patients, respectively (p = 0.025 for noninferiority; p = 0.77 for difference). Key secondary end points for device and procedural success were similar between randomly assigned treatment strategies. CONCLUSIONS: The Interceptor PLUS Coronary Filter System is noninferior in safety and efficacy to 30 days when compared with the GuardWire and FilterWire EZ distal embolic protection devices.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]