Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objectives: We conducted this trial to assess whether a sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) produces similar results to a paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) when used in the real world of interventional cardiology.
Background: Several drug-eluting stents have been shown to exert a beneficial effect on restenosis when used in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Any potential superiority of one drug over the others, however, is still unknown.
Methods: To evaluate whether a PES or an SES is superior in daily practice, we randomized all patients suitable to receive a drug-eluting stent in our institution. Clinical follow-up was obtained after at least six months.
Results: A total of 202 patients were included in this trial. One hundred patients received a PES and 102 received an SES. Procedural success was 99% in both groups. Incidence of major adverse cardiac events at follow-up (mean 7 +/- 2 months) was 4% with the PES and 6% with the SES (p = 0.8). The need for target lesion revascularization was very low in both groups (1% with the PES and 3% with the SES).
Conclusions: Our results confirm that the high success rate obtained with both stents in randomized trials can be replicated in routine clinical practice. In this small group of patients we were unable to show any advantage of one stent over the other.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2004.10.062 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!