The Experts below are selected from a list of 34977 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Richard E Kuntz - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
randomized trial of a distal embolic Protection Device during percutaneous intervention of saphenous vein aorto coronary bypass grafts
Circulation, 2002Co-Authors: Donald S Baim, Dennis W Wahr, Barry S George, Joel Greenberg, Unsal Kaya, Donald E Cutlip, Kalon K L Ho, Martin B Leon, Richard E KuntzAbstract:Background— Stents provide effective treatment for stenotic saphenous venous aorto-coronary bypass grafts, but their placement carries a 20% incidence of procedure-related complications, which potentially are related to the distal embolization of atherosclerotic debris. We report the first multicenter randomized trial to evaluate use of a distal embolic Protection Device during stenting of such lesions. Methods and Results— Of 801 eligible patients, 406 were randomly assigned to stent placement over the shaft of the distal Protection Device, and 395 were assigned to stent placement over a conventional 0.014-inch angioplasty guidewire (control group). The primary end point—a composite of death, myocardial infarction, emergency bypass, or target lesion revascularization by 30 days—was observed in 65 patients (16.5%) assigned to the control group and 39 patients (9.6%) assigned to the embolic Protection Device (P=0.004). This 42% relative reduction in major adverse cardiac events was driven by myocardial inf...
-
Randomized trial of a distal embolic Protection Device during percutaneous intervention of saphenous vein aorto-coronary bypass grafts
Journal of Invasive Cardiology, 2002Co-Authors: Donald S Baim, Dennis W Wahr, Barry S George, Joel Greenberg, Unsal Kaya, Donald E Cutlip, Martin B Leon, Richard E KuntzAbstract:Background. Stents provide effective treatment for stenotic saphenous venous aorto-coronary bypass grafts, but their placement carries a 20% incidence of procedure-related complications, which potentially are related to the distal embolization of atherosclerotic debris. We report the first multicenter randomized trial to evaluate use of a distal embolic Protection Device during stenting of such lesions. Methods and Results. Of 801 eligible patients, there were 406 randomly assigned to stent placement over the shaft of the distal Protection Device, and 395 were assigned to stent placement over a conventional 0.014" angioplasty guidewire (control group). The primary endpoint - a composite of death, myocardial infarction, emergency bypass, or target lesion revascularization by 30 days - was observed in 65 patients (16.5%) assigned to the control group, and 39 patients (9.6%) assigned to the embolic Protection Device (p = 0.004). This 42% relative reduction in major adverse cardiac events was driven by myocardial infarction (8.6% versus 14.7%; p = 0.008) and "no-reflow" phenomenon (3% versus 9%; p = 0.02). Clinical benefit was seen even when platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor blockers were administered (61% of patients), with composite endpoints occurring in 10.7% of Protection Device patients versus 19.4% of control patients (p = 0.008). Conclusions. Use of this distal Protection Device during stenting of stenotic venous grafts was associated with a highly significant reduction in major adverse events compared with stenting over a conventional angioplasty guidewire. This demonstrates the importance of distal embolization in causing major adverse cardiac events and the value of embolic Protection Devices in preventing such complications.
Donald S Baim - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
randomized trial of a distal embolic Protection Device during percutaneous intervention of saphenous vein aorto coronary bypass grafts
Circulation, 2002Co-Authors: Donald S Baim, Dennis W Wahr, Barry S George, Joel Greenberg, Unsal Kaya, Donald E Cutlip, Kalon K L Ho, Martin B Leon, Richard E KuntzAbstract:Background— Stents provide effective treatment for stenotic saphenous venous aorto-coronary bypass grafts, but their placement carries a 20% incidence of procedure-related complications, which potentially are related to the distal embolization of atherosclerotic debris. We report the first multicenter randomized trial to evaluate use of a distal embolic Protection Device during stenting of such lesions. Methods and Results— Of 801 eligible patients, 406 were randomly assigned to stent placement over the shaft of the distal Protection Device, and 395 were assigned to stent placement over a conventional 0.014-inch angioplasty guidewire (control group). The primary end point—a composite of death, myocardial infarction, emergency bypass, or target lesion revascularization by 30 days—was observed in 65 patients (16.5%) assigned to the control group and 39 patients (9.6%) assigned to the embolic Protection Device (P=0.004). This 42% relative reduction in major adverse cardiac events was driven by myocardial inf...
-
Randomized trial of a distal embolic Protection Device during percutaneous intervention of saphenous vein aorto-coronary bypass grafts
Journal of Invasive Cardiology, 2002Co-Authors: Donald S Baim, Dennis W Wahr, Barry S George, Joel Greenberg, Unsal Kaya, Donald E Cutlip, Martin B Leon, Richard E KuntzAbstract:Background. Stents provide effective treatment for stenotic saphenous venous aorto-coronary bypass grafts, but their placement carries a 20% incidence of procedure-related complications, which potentially are related to the distal embolization of atherosclerotic debris. We report the first multicenter randomized trial to evaluate use of a distal embolic Protection Device during stenting of such lesions. Methods and Results. Of 801 eligible patients, there were 406 randomly assigned to stent placement over the shaft of the distal Protection Device, and 395 were assigned to stent placement over a conventional 0.014" angioplasty guidewire (control group). The primary endpoint - a composite of death, myocardial infarction, emergency bypass, or target lesion revascularization by 30 days - was observed in 65 patients (16.5%) assigned to the control group, and 39 patients (9.6%) assigned to the embolic Protection Device (p = 0.004). This 42% relative reduction in major adverse cardiac events was driven by myocardial infarction (8.6% versus 14.7%; p = 0.008) and "no-reflow" phenomenon (3% versus 9%; p = 0.02). Clinical benefit was seen even when platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor blockers were administered (61% of patients), with composite endpoints occurring in 10.7% of Protection Device patients versus 19.4% of control patients (p = 0.008). Conclusions. Use of this distal Protection Device during stenting of stenotic venous grafts was associated with a highly significant reduction in major adverse events compared with stenting over a conventional angioplasty guidewire. This demonstrates the importance of distal embolization in causing major adverse cardiac events and the value of embolic Protection Devices in preventing such complications.
Campbell Rogers - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A Novel, Low-Profile Filter-Wire (Interceptor) Embolic Protection Device During Saphenous Vein Graft Stenting
The American journal of cardiology, 2005Co-Authors: John J. Young, Dean J. Kereiakes, Abram C. Rabinowitz, Richard F. Ammar, Fred L. Boucher, Campbell RogersAbstract:A novel, low-profile filter embolic Protection Device was deployed in 26 patients who underwent stent deployment for saphenous vein graft stenoses in a multicenter trial. Major adverse cardiovascular events were observed in only 2 patients (7.7%) and angiographic flow grades were improved.
Martin B Leon - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
randomized trial of a distal embolic Protection Device during percutaneous intervention of saphenous vein aorto coronary bypass grafts
Circulation, 2002Co-Authors: Donald S Baim, Dennis W Wahr, Barry S George, Joel Greenberg, Unsal Kaya, Donald E Cutlip, Kalon K L Ho, Martin B Leon, Richard E KuntzAbstract:Background— Stents provide effective treatment for stenotic saphenous venous aorto-coronary bypass grafts, but their placement carries a 20% incidence of procedure-related complications, which potentially are related to the distal embolization of atherosclerotic debris. We report the first multicenter randomized trial to evaluate use of a distal embolic Protection Device during stenting of such lesions. Methods and Results— Of 801 eligible patients, 406 were randomly assigned to stent placement over the shaft of the distal Protection Device, and 395 were assigned to stent placement over a conventional 0.014-inch angioplasty guidewire (control group). The primary end point—a composite of death, myocardial infarction, emergency bypass, or target lesion revascularization by 30 days—was observed in 65 patients (16.5%) assigned to the control group and 39 patients (9.6%) assigned to the embolic Protection Device (P=0.004). This 42% relative reduction in major adverse cardiac events was driven by myocardial inf...
-
Randomized trial of a distal embolic Protection Device during percutaneous intervention of saphenous vein aorto-coronary bypass grafts
Journal of Invasive Cardiology, 2002Co-Authors: Donald S Baim, Dennis W Wahr, Barry S George, Joel Greenberg, Unsal Kaya, Donald E Cutlip, Martin B Leon, Richard E KuntzAbstract:Background. Stents provide effective treatment for stenotic saphenous venous aorto-coronary bypass grafts, but their placement carries a 20% incidence of procedure-related complications, which potentially are related to the distal embolization of atherosclerotic debris. We report the first multicenter randomized trial to evaluate use of a distal embolic Protection Device during stenting of such lesions. Methods and Results. Of 801 eligible patients, there were 406 randomly assigned to stent placement over the shaft of the distal Protection Device, and 395 were assigned to stent placement over a conventional 0.014" angioplasty guidewire (control group). The primary endpoint - a composite of death, myocardial infarction, emergency bypass, or target lesion revascularization by 30 days - was observed in 65 patients (16.5%) assigned to the control group, and 39 patients (9.6%) assigned to the embolic Protection Device (p = 0.004). This 42% relative reduction in major adverse cardiac events was driven by myocardial infarction (8.6% versus 14.7%; p = 0.008) and "no-reflow" phenomenon (3% versus 9%; p = 0.02). Clinical benefit was seen even when platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor blockers were administered (61% of patients), with composite endpoints occurring in 10.7% of Protection Device patients versus 19.4% of control patients (p = 0.008). Conclusions. Use of this distal Protection Device during stenting of stenotic venous grafts was associated with a highly significant reduction in major adverse events compared with stenting over a conventional angioplasty guidewire. This demonstrates the importance of distal embolization in causing major adverse cardiac events and the value of embolic Protection Devices in preventing such complications.
Unsal Kaya - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
randomized trial of a distal embolic Protection Device during percutaneous intervention of saphenous vein aorto coronary bypass grafts
Circulation, 2002Co-Authors: Donald S Baim, Dennis W Wahr, Barry S George, Joel Greenberg, Unsal Kaya, Donald E Cutlip, Kalon K L Ho, Martin B Leon, Richard E KuntzAbstract:Background— Stents provide effective treatment for stenotic saphenous venous aorto-coronary bypass grafts, but their placement carries a 20% incidence of procedure-related complications, which potentially are related to the distal embolization of atherosclerotic debris. We report the first multicenter randomized trial to evaluate use of a distal embolic Protection Device during stenting of such lesions. Methods and Results— Of 801 eligible patients, 406 were randomly assigned to stent placement over the shaft of the distal Protection Device, and 395 were assigned to stent placement over a conventional 0.014-inch angioplasty guidewire (control group). The primary end point—a composite of death, myocardial infarction, emergency bypass, or target lesion revascularization by 30 days—was observed in 65 patients (16.5%) assigned to the control group and 39 patients (9.6%) assigned to the embolic Protection Device (P=0.004). This 42% relative reduction in major adverse cardiac events was driven by myocardial inf...
-
Randomized trial of a distal embolic Protection Device during percutaneous intervention of saphenous vein aorto-coronary bypass grafts
Journal of Invasive Cardiology, 2002Co-Authors: Donald S Baim, Dennis W Wahr, Barry S George, Joel Greenberg, Unsal Kaya, Donald E Cutlip, Martin B Leon, Richard E KuntzAbstract:Background. Stents provide effective treatment for stenotic saphenous venous aorto-coronary bypass grafts, but their placement carries a 20% incidence of procedure-related complications, which potentially are related to the distal embolization of atherosclerotic debris. We report the first multicenter randomized trial to evaluate use of a distal embolic Protection Device during stenting of such lesions. Methods and Results. Of 801 eligible patients, there were 406 randomly assigned to stent placement over the shaft of the distal Protection Device, and 395 were assigned to stent placement over a conventional 0.014" angioplasty guidewire (control group). The primary endpoint - a composite of death, myocardial infarction, emergency bypass, or target lesion revascularization by 30 days - was observed in 65 patients (16.5%) assigned to the control group, and 39 patients (9.6%) assigned to the embolic Protection Device (p = 0.004). This 42% relative reduction in major adverse cardiac events was driven by myocardial infarction (8.6% versus 14.7%; p = 0.008) and "no-reflow" phenomenon (3% versus 9%; p = 0.02). Clinical benefit was seen even when platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor blockers were administered (61% of patients), with composite endpoints occurring in 10.7% of Protection Device patients versus 19.4% of control patients (p = 0.008). Conclusions. Use of this distal Protection Device during stenting of stenotic venous grafts was associated with a highly significant reduction in major adverse events compared with stenting over a conventional angioplasty guidewire. This demonstrates the importance of distal embolization in causing major adverse cardiac events and the value of embolic Protection Devices in preventing such complications.
