Percutaneous coronary intervention for late reperfusion after myocardial infarction in stable patients

dc.contributor.authorIoannidis, J. P.en
dc.contributor.authorKatritsis, D. G.en
dc.date.accessioned2015-11-24T18:59:45Z
dc.date.available2015-11-24T18:59:45Z
dc.identifier.issn1097-6744-
dc.identifier.urihttps://olympias.lib.uoi.gr/jspui/handle/123456789/19404
dc.rightsDefault Licence-
dc.subject*Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronaryen
dc.subjectFemaleen
dc.subjectHeart Failure/etiologyen
dc.subjectHumansen
dc.subjectMaleen
dc.subjectMyocardial Infarction/*drug therapy/mortality/*therapyen
dc.subjectMyocardial Reperfusion/methodsen
dc.subjectStroke Volumeen
dc.titlePercutaneous coronary intervention for late reperfusion after myocardial infarction in stable patientsen
heal.abstractBACKGROUND: Results of randomized trials that have compared mechanical coronary artery recanalization versus medical therapy for total occlusion late after myocardial infarction (MI) have been conflicting. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with medical therapy in stable patients with an occluded artery 1 to 45 days after MI. Six trials and one substudy were included with data on 2617 patients for the clinical outcomes and 653 patients for determination of ejection fraction (EF) during follow-up. Outcomes included death, MI, death or MI, congestive heart failure (CHF), and change in left ventricular EF. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences for any clinical outcome, with trends for an increase in MI (risk ratio 1.26, P = .19) and decrease in CHF (risk ratio 0.67, P = .19) in the PCI arm. The PCI arm showed a slight superiority in left ventricular EF (2%, 95% CI 0.1%-2.8%). Early smaller studies showed formally statistically significant benefits for CHF and EF, but the much larger Occluded Artery Trial and Total Occlusion Study of Canada 2 found no benefit. For CHF, the difference between early smaller studies and Occluded Artery Trial was beyond chance (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous coronary intervention does not seem to confer any benefits when used for late revascularization of occluded arteries after MI in stable patients.en
heal.accesscampus-
heal.fullTextAvailabilityTRUE-
heal.identifier.primary10.1016/j.ahj.2007.07.049-
heal.identifier.secondaryhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18035076-
heal.identifier.secondaryhttp://ac.els-cdn.com/S0002870307006680/1-s2.0-S0002870307006680-main.pdf?_tid=cb2515330361e735d76d752fca0e6d34&acdnat=1333363861_f4add5b22fcfb4d1c718f4edccd0b94e-
heal.journalNameAm Heart Jen
heal.journalTypepeer-reviewed-
heal.languageen-
heal.publicationDate2007-
heal.recordProviderΠανεπιστήμιο Ιωαννίνων. Σχολή Επιστημών Υγείας. Τμήμα Ιατρικήςel
heal.typejournalArticle-
heal.type.elΆρθρο Περιοδικούel
heal.type.enJournal articleen

Αρχεία

Φάκελος/Πακέτο αδειών

Προβολή: 1 - 1 of 1
Φόρτωση...
Μικρογραφία εικόνας
Ονομα:
license.txt
Μέγεθος:
1.74 KB
Μορφότυπο:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Περιγραφή: