Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Coronary calcification is a well-known marker of atherosclerotic plaque burden and a determinant of stent under expansion with unfavorable long-term outcomes.
Aims: This sub study of the randomized BIOVASC trial aimed to compare immediate complete revascularization (ICR) and staged complete revascularization (SCR) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and multi vessel disease (MVD), stratified by calcification of the culprit lesion.
Methods: The primary endpoint consisted of a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, unplanned ischemia driven revascularization (UIDR) and cerebrovascular events at 2 year follow-up. Secondary endpoints included the individual components of the primary composite and major bleedings. We used cox regression models to relate study endpoints with randomized treatment stratified by calcification of the culprit lesion.
Results: The BIOVASC trial enrolled 103 patients with a moderately or severely calcified culprit lesion. The composite primary outcome occurred in 8/57 (14.3%) versus 9/46 (19.7%) patients randomized to ICR and SCR (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66% and 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-1.71, p = 0.39). In the non-calcified culprit lesions, there were 83 events in the ICR (12.4%) and 82 events in the SCR (11.9%) (HR 1.01 [0.75-1.37], p = 0.94, P-interaction = 0.42). There was no evidence of a differential effect of ICR vs. SCR on the primary endpoint in relation to culprit lesion calcification (P-interaction = 0.42).
Conclusion: No differential treatment effect of ICR versus SCR was observed when comparing the primary composite outcome between calcified and non-calcified culprit lesion.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12159363 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31495 | DOI Listing |