Drug-eluting stents vs. bare metal stents in patients with cardiogenic shock: a comparison by propensity score analysis
| Autor: | Burkhardt Seifert, Stephan Windecker, Brahmajee K. Nallamothu, Thomas F. Lüscher, Jelena-Rima Ghadri, Ulf Landmesser, Oliver Gaemperli, Willibald Maier, Paola E. Herrera, Thierry Hiestand, Milosz Jaguszewski, Christian Templin |
|---|---|
| Přispěvatelé: | University of Zurich, Templin, Christian |
| Rok vydání: | 2015 |
| Předmět: |
Bare-metal stent
Male medicine.medical_specialty medicine.medical_treatment Shock Cardiogenic 610 Medicine & health 2705 Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Internal medicine medicine Humans Myocardial infarction Propensity Score Aged Retrospective Studies business.industry Cardiogenic shock Hazard ratio Percutaneous coronary intervention Stent Drug-Eluting Stents 10060 Epidemiology Biostatistics and Prevention Institute (EBPI) General Medicine Middle Aged medicine.disease Treatment Outcome Drug-eluting stent Conventional PCI 10209 Clinic for Cardiology Cardiology Female Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine business |
| Zdroj: | Jaguszewski, Milosz; Ghadri, Jelena-Rima; Seifert, Burkhardt; Hiestand, Thierry; Herrera, Paola; Gaemperli, Oliver; Landmesser, Ulf; Maier, Willibald; Nallamothu, Brahmajee K; Windecker, Stephan; Lüscher, Thomas F; Templin, Christian (2015). Drug-eluting stents vs. bare metal stents in patients with cardiogenic shock: a comparison by propensity score analysis. Journal of cardiovascular medicine, 16(3), pp. 220-229. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 10.2459/JCM.0000000000000106 |
| DOI: | 10.5167/uzh-98111 |
| Popis: | BACKGROUND In patients with cardiogenic shock, data on the comparative safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents (DESs) vs. bare metal stents (BMSs) are lacking. We sought to assess the performance of DESs compared with BMSs among patients with cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS Out of 236 patients with acute coronary syndromes complicated by cardiogenic shock, 203 were included in the final analysis. The primary endpoint included death, and the secondary endpoint of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) included the composite of death, myocardial infarction, any repeat revascularization and stroke. Patients were followed for a minimum of 30 days and up to 4 years. As stent assignment was not random, we performed a propensity score analysis to minimize potential bias. RESULTS Among patients treated with DESs, there was a lower risk of the primary and secondary endpoints compared with BMSs at 30 days (29 vs. 56%, P |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|