Full metadata record

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.author박종선ko
dc.contributor.author송영빈[송영빈]ko
dc.contributor.author한주영[한주영]ko
dc.contributor.author양정훈[양정훈]ko
dc.contributor.author최승혁[최승혁]ko
dc.contributor.author최진호[최진호]ko
dc.contributor.author이상훈[이상훈]ko
dc.contributor.author정명호[정명호]ko
dc.contributor.author김효수[김효수]ko
dc.contributor.author이재환[이재환]ko
dc.contributor.author유철웅[유철웅]ko
dc.contributor.author라승운[라승운]ko
dc.contributor.author장양수[장양수]ko
dc.contributor.author윤정한[윤정한]ko
dc.contributor.author탁승제[탁승제]ko
dc.contributor.author승기배[승기배]ko
dc.contributor.author오주현[오주현]ko
dc.contributor.author권현철[권현철]ko
dc.date.accessioned2015-12-17T04:55:54Z-
dc.date.available2015-12-17T04:55:54Z-
dc.date.created2015-11-13-
dc.date.issued201403-
dc.identifier.citationJACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, v.7, no.3, pp.255 - 263-
dc.identifier.issn1936-8798-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/YU.REPOSITORY/32819-
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2013.11.009-
dc.description.abstractObjectives The authors sought to investigate whether the impact of treatment strategies on clinical outcomes differed between patients with left main (LM) bifurcation lesions and those with non-LM bifurcation lesions. Background Few studies have considered anatomic location when comparing 1- and 2-stent strategies for bifurcation lesions. Methods We compared the prognostic impact of treatment strategies on clinical outcomes in 2,044 patients with non-LM bifurcation lesions and 853 with LM bifurcation lesions. The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF) defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization. Results The 2-stent strategy was used more frequently in the LM bifurcation group than in the non-LM bifurcation group (40.3% vs. 20.8%, p < 0.01). During a median follow-up of 36 months, the 2-stent strategy was not associated with a higher incidence of cardiac death (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72 to 2.14; p = 0.44), cardiac death or MI (HR: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.58 to 2.19; p = 0.73), or TLF (HR: 1.39; 95% CI: 0.99 to 1.94; p = 0.06) in the non-LM bifurcation group. In contrast, in patients with LM bifurcation lesions, the 2-stent strategy was associated with a higher incidence of cardiac death (HR: 2.43; 95% CI: 1.05 to 5.59; p = 0.04), cardiac death or MI (HR: 2.09; 95% CI: 1.08 to 4.04; p = 0.03), as well as TLF (HR: 2.38; 95% CI: 1.60 to 3.55; p < 0.01). Significant interactions were present between treatment strategies and bifurcation lesion locations for TLF (p = 0.01). Conclusions The 1-stent strategy, if possible, should initially be considered the preferred approach for the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions, especially LM bifurcation lesions. (Korean Coronary Bifurcation Stenting [COBIS] Registry II; NCT01642992) (C) 2014 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation-
dc.language영어-
dc.publisherELSEVIER SCIENCE INC-
dc.subjectSIROLIMUS-ELUTING STENTS-
dc.subjectARTERY BIFURCATION-
dc.subjectCLINICAL-OUTCOMES-
dc.subjectRANDOMIZED-TRIAL-
dc.subjectCRUSH TECHNIQUE-
dc.subjectRESTENOSIS-
dc.subjectNARROWINGS-
dc.subjectTHROMBOSIS-
dc.subjectSTENOSIS-
dc.titleDifferential Prognostic Impact of Treatment Strategy Among Patients With Left Main Versus Non-Left Main Bifurcation Lesions Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Results From the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) Registry II-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.wosid000333277600007-
dc.identifier.scopusid2-s2.0-84896546474-
Appears in Collections:
의과대학 > 내과학교실 > Articles
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML


qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

BROWSE