Clinical outcomes of primary stenting versus balloon angioplasty in patients with myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Nordmann, Alain; Hengstler, Peter; Harr, Thomas; Young, Jim; Bucher, Heiner C.

doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2003.08.035

Cited by 98 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…110 Compared with balloon angioplasty, routine BMS implantation during primary PCI decreases risk for TVR and possibly reduces MI rates but does not reduce mortality rates. 111,112 Two-year data from the Massachusetts registry 113 from 1221 propensity score-matched pairs of DES and BMS patients demonstrated a reduction in mortality and TVR rates with DES in primary PCI, and an analysis from the New York State registry 114 found a reduction in mortality rates but not TVR rates with DES. These reports were limited to patients treated before 2005, so they represent the earliest experience with DES, in which selection bias may have influenced stent choice and off-label use may have been pursued more cautiously.…”

Section: Stent Selection For Stemimentioning

confidence: 99%

2009 Focused Updates: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (Updating the 2004 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI Guidelines on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Updating the 2005 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update)

Kushner¹,

Hand²,

Smith³

et al. 2009

Circulation

1,248

709

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Copies: This document is available on the World Wide Web sites of the American College of Cardiology (www.acc.org), the American Heart Association (my.americanheart.org), and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (scai.org). A copy of the document is also available at http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifierϭ3003999 by selecting either the "topic list" link or the "chronological list" link (No. KJ-0734). To purchase additional reprints, call 843-216-2533 or e-mail kelle.ramsay@wolterskluwer.com.Expert peer review of AHA Scientific Statements is conducted at the AHA National Center. For more on AHA statements and guidelines development, visit http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifierϭ3023366.Permissions: Multiple copies, modification, alteration, enhancement, and/or distribution of this document are not permitted without the express permission of the American Heart Association. Instructions for obtaining permission are located at http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml? identifierϭ4431. A link to the "Permission Request Form" appears on the right side of the page. STEMI and PCI Focused Updates PreambleA primary challenge in the development of clinical practice guidelines is keeping pace with the stream of new data on which recommendations are based. In an effort to respond promptly to new evidence, the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association (ACCF/AHA) Task Force on Practice Guidelines has created a "focused update" process to revise the existing guideline recommendations that are affected by evolving data or opinion. Before the initiation of this focused approach, periodic updates and revisions of existing guidelines required up to 3 years to complete. Now, however, new evidence will be reviewed in an ongoing fashion to more efficiently respond to important science and treatment trends that could have a major impact on patient outcomes and quality of care. Evidence will be reviewed at least twice a year, and updates will be initiated on an as-needed basis as quickly as possible, while maintaining the rigorous methodology that the ACCF and AHA have developed during their 25 years of partnership.These updated guideline recommendations reflect a consensus of expert opinion after a thorough review primarily of late-breaking clinical trials identified through a broad-based vetting process as being important to the relevant patient population, as well as a review of other new data deemed to have an impact on patient care (see Section 1.1, Methodology and Evidence Review, for details). This focused update is not intended to represent an update based on a full literature review from the date of the previous guideline publication. Specific criteria/considerations for inclusion of new data include the following:• publication in a peer-reviewed journal;• large randomized, placebo-controlled trial(s);• nonrandomized data deemed important on the basis of results that affect current safety and efficacy assumptions; • strength/weakness of ...

show abstract

Section: Stent Selection For Stemimentioning

confidence: 99%

2009 Focused Updates: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (Updating the 2004 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI Guidelines on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Updating the 2005 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update)

Kushner¹,

Hand²,

Smith³

et al. 2009

Circulation

1,248

709

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Compared with balloon angioplasty, BMS implantation during primary PCI decreases the risk for subsequent target-lesion and target-vessel revascularization and possibly the risk for reinfarction, but is not associated with a reduction in the mortality rate. 238 Compared with BMS, DES implantation decreases restenosis rates and the need for reintervention but does not definitively reduce rates of death or reinfarction. Notably, DES in this setting does not increase the risk of early or late stent thrombosis.…”

Section: Downloaded From E375mentioning

confidence: 99%

2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

O’Gara¹,

Kushner²,

Ascheim³

et al. 2013

Circulation

2,518

930

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…210,478 Compared with balloon angioplasty, routine BMS implantation during primary PCI decreases risk for target-vessel revascularization and possibly reduces MI rates but does not reduce mortality rates. 479 More recent primary PCI studies and meta-analyses have demonstrated lower restenosis rates without increased risk of adverse stent outcome with DES compared with BMS. Although stent thrombosis rates in trials of STEMI are higher than in trials of elective PCI, the rates of stent thrombosis are not higher with DES compared with BMS in STEMI.…”

Section: Coronary Stents: Recommendationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Levine

Bates²,

Blankenship³

et al. 2011

Circulation

1,876

567

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Clinical outcomes of primary stenting versus balloon angioplasty in patients with myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Cited by 98 publications

References 29 publications

2009 Focused Updates: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (Updating the 2004 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI Guidelines on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Updating the 2005 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update)

2009 Focused Updates: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (Updating the 2004 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI Guidelines on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (Updating the 2005 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update)

2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About