Blog
About

0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Angiographic Outcome in Multivessel Disease (GABI II Study) Using New Coronary Device Interventions and Comparison with GABI I Trial Results

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Percutaneous coronary interventions using stents were investigated in patients with multivessel disease. Acute and long-term results were compared with those of the German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation trial in a prospective multicenter study. The study included 134 patients in whom 277 lesions were treated. Angiographic success and procedural success were achieved in 268 of 277 lesions (97%) and 118 of 134 patients (88%), respectively. Control angiography performed in 90 of 118 eligible patients (76%) exhibited restenosis in 43 of 182 lesions (24%). Multivariate regression analysis found that a diffuse lesion, the lesion and stent length, and the final luminal diameter were predictive for restenosis. Thus, immediate and long-term results of multivessel coronary intervention utilizing stents were improved compared to percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty of multivessel lesions. However, there is still need for improvement of long-term results, especially in particular lesion subgroups.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 10

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A randomized trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST)

          The clinical benefit of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) as compared with coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease has not been established. To determine the outcomes of these treatments in patients referred for the first time for coronary revascularization, we conducted a three-year prospective, randomized trial comparing the two procedures. Revascularization was performed by accepted methods. Follow-up clinical information was collected every six months, and coronary arteriography and thallium stress scanning were performed at one and three years. The primary end point was a composite of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, and a large ischemic defect identified on thallium scanning at three years. Secondary end points included clinical and angiographic status and the need for additional revascularization procedures. Data were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Of the 5118 patients screened for the trial, 842 (16.5 percent) were eligible for enrollment, and 392 (7.7 percent) agreed to participate. A total of 194 patients were randomly assigned to the CABG group, and 198 to the PTCA group. The primary end point occurred in 27.3 percent of the CABG group and 28.8 percent of the PTCA group (P = 0.81). Death occurred in 6.2 percent of the CABG group and 7.1 percent of the PTCA group (P = 0.73 by log-rank test). At three years, the proportions of patients in the CABG group who required repeated bypass surgery (1 percent) or angioplasty (13 percent) were significantly lower than the proportions in the PTCA group (22 and 41 percent, respectively; P < 0.001). Angiographic studies at three years showed a greater degree of revascularization in the CABG group. Angina was more frequent in the PTCA group (20 percent) than in the CABG group (12 percent). We found that CABG and PTCA did not differ significantly with respect to the occurrence of the composite primary end point. Consequently, the selection of one procedure over the other should be guided by patients' preferences regarding the quality of life and the possible need for subsequent procedures.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A randomized study of coronary angioplasty compared with bypass surgery in patients with symptomatic multivessel coronary disease. German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation (GABI)

            The standard treatment for patients with symptomatic multivessel coronary artery disease is coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG). Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) is widely used as an alternative approach to revascularization, but a systematic comparison of the two procedures is needed. We compared the outcomes in patients one year after complete revascularization with CABG or PTCA. A total of 8981 patients with multivessel coronary disease were screened at eight clinical sites, and 359 patients were randomly assigned to undergo CABG (177 patients) or PTCA (182 patients). Enrollment required that complete revascularization of at least two major vessels supplying different myocardial regions be deemed clinically necessary and technically feasible. Among the patients in the CABG group, an average of 2.2 +/- 0.6 vessels were grafted, and among those in the PTCA group, 1.9 +/- 0.5 vessels were dilated. After CABG, hospitalization was longer (median, 19, as compared with 5 days for PTCA), and Q-wave myocardial infarction in relation to the procedure was more frequent (8.1 percent, as compared with 2.3 percent after PTCA; P = 0.022), whereas in-hospital mortality did not differ significantly between the two groups (2.5 percent in the CABG group and 1.1 percent in the PTCA group). At discharge 93 percent of the patients in the CABG group were free of angina, as compared with 82 percent of those in the PTCA group (P = 0.005). During the first year of follow-up, further interventions were necessary in 44 percent of the patients in the PTCA group (repeated PTCA in 23 percent, CABG in 18 percent, and both in 3 percent) but in only 6 percent of the patients in the CABG group (repeated CABG in 1 percent and PTCA in 5 percent; P < 0.001). Seventy-four percent of the patients in the CABG group and 71 percent of those in the PTCA group were free of angina one year after treatment. Exercise capacity improved similarly in both groups. However, 22 percent of the CABG group, as compared with only 12 percent of the PTCA group, did not require antianginal medication (P = 0.041). In selected patients with multivessel coronary disease, PTCA and CABG as initial treatments resulted in equivalent improvement in angina after one year. However, in order to achieve similar clinical outcomes, the patients treated with PTCA were more likely to require further interventions and antianginal drugs, whereas the patients treated with CABG were more likely to sustain an acute myocardial infarction at the time of the procedure.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Randomised comparison of implantation of heparin-coated stents with balloon angioplasty in selected patients with coronary artery disease (Benestent II)

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                CRD
                Cardiology
                10.1159/issn.0008-6312
                Cardiology
                S. Karger AG
                0008-6312
                1421-9751
                2004
                April 2004
                28 April 2004
                : 102
                : 1
                : 24-31
                Affiliations
                aGerman Clinic for Diagnostic, Wiesbaden, bDepartment of Cardiology, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, cDepartment of Cardiology, University of Mainz, Mainz, dGeneral Hospital St. Georg, Hamburg, eDepartment of Cardiology, University of Aachen, Aachen, fDepartment of Cardiology, Kerckhoff Hospital, Bad Nauheim, Germany
                Article
                76999 Cardiology 2004;102:24–31
                10.1159/000076999
                14988615
                © 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel

                Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

                Page count
                Tables: 4, References: 31, Pages: 8
                Categories
                Cardiac Catheterization and Interventional Cardiology

                Comments

                Comment on this article