ライフサイエンスコーパス: coronary revascularization

1 orted CHD (previous myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization).

2 hospitalization for unstable angina, or any coronary revascularization).

3 ssion for acute coronary syndrome, or repeat coronary revascularization).

4 CHD death, and hospitalization for angina or coronary revascularization).

5 h, nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke, coronary revascularization).

6 MIs, and 154 hospitalizations for angina or coronary revascularizations).

7 on of the appropriate use criteria (AUC) for coronary revascularization.

8 of coronary death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization.

9 oke, hospitalization for unstable angina, or coronary revascularization.

10 g to whether patients had undergone previous coronary revascularization.

11 ardiac catheterization and history of ACS or coronary revascularization.

12 ibrillating device; 2640 (31%) had undergone coronary revascularization.

13 th refractory angina who were ineligible for coronary revascularization.

14 composite of all-cause death, MI, stroke, or coronary revascularization.

15 ercutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) for coronary revascularization.

16 o benefited from random assignment to prompt coronary revascularization.

17 .5%) patients, of whom 1253 (64.2%) received coronary revascularization.

18 ar events who might also benefit from prompt coronary revascularization.

19 using the 2012 Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization.

20 4.5 years), while 23 patients underwent late coronary revascularization.

21 ncluded claims for myocardial infarction and coronary revascularization.

22 cluded all-cause death, unstable angina, and coronary revascularization.

23 of subsequent events in patients undergoing coronary revascularization.

24 iovascular death, myocardial infarction, and coronary revascularization.

25 ed with lower rates of death, MI, and repeat coronary revascularization.

26 rtality, nonfatal ACS, stroke, and unplanned coronary revascularization.

27 0-day events and the need for posttransplant coronary revascularization.

28 for secondary prevention after percutaneous coronary revascularization.

29 rdial infarction, unstable angina, or urgent coronary revascularization.

30 rval, 1.01-1.65) were more likely to receive coronary revascularization.

31 than 136 kg (200 lb), and had no history of coronary revascularization.

32 versus 2.6% of those receiving UC underwent coronary revascularization.

33 arction, ischemic stroke, or ischemia-driven coronary revascularization.

34 mined using the Appropriate Use Criteria for coronary revascularization.

35 ator implantation can improve outcomes after coronary revascularization.

36 al or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) or coronary revascularization.

37 iagnosis of myocardial infarction (MI) after coronary revascularization.

38 t ischemia with rehospitalization, or urgent coronary revascularization.

39 350 surgical patients who had not undergone coronary revascularization.

40 published joint appropriateness criteria for coronary revascularization.

41 in 69% who had an appropriate indication for coronary revascularization.

42 graphy promptly with the intent to carry out coronary revascularization.

43 an indispensable tool for decision making in coronary revascularization.

44 ry death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization.

45 ith lung disease were less likely to receive coronary revascularization.

46 %) had a history of myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization.

47 to participate in shared decision-making for coronary revascularization.

48 %) had a history of myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization.

49 urgent hospitalization for angina leading to coronary revascularization.

50 with lung disease are less likely to receive coronary revascularization.

51 k patients to identify those who do not need coronary revascularization.

52 urgent hospitalization for angina leading to coronary revascularization.

53 he primary end point was freedom from repeat coronary revascularization.

54 , hospital admission for unstable angina, or coronary revascularization.

55 oke, hospitalization for unstable angina, or coronary revascularization.

56 ncreased risk for ischemic events, including coronary revascularizations.

57 ce interval, -0.008% to 0.002%; P=0.705) and coronary revascularization (-0.02%; 95% confidence inter

58 nd point of major cardiovascular events plus coronary revascularization, 0.96 (95% CI, 0.86 to 1.08);

59 nnualized rates of primary outcome (<1%) and coronary revascularization (1% to 3%), across all years

60 ury remained less likely than men to undergo coronary revascularization (15% vs. 34%) and to receive

61 Among T2MI2007, 6.3% of patients received coronary revascularization, 22% dual-antiplatelet therap

62 was lower for minimally invasive surgery for coronary revascularization (-$30,850; 95% CI, -$31,629 t

63 5% CI, 2.5%-4.1%) was similar to rates after coronary revascularization (4.0%; 95% CI, 2.6%-5.4%) and

64 ified 23 033 dialysis patients who underwent coronary revascularization (6178 coronary artery bypass

65 11.4 patients/100 person-years; P<0.001) and coronary revascularization (8.8 vs 3.2 patients/100 pers

66 less likely to receive primary percutaneous coronary revascularization (84% versus 79% with HF, P<0.

67 beneficiaries with STEMI had lower rates of coronary revascularization (88.9% versus 92.3%; odds rat

68 d for chest pain; there were no instances of coronary revascularization, ACS, or death (0% for all; 9

69 Cardiac catheterization, coronary revascularization, acute myocardial infarction,

70 ced among 210 cTn- patients undergoing early coronary revascularization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.61;

71 nformation on rates and predictors of repeat coronary revascularization after CABG in the modern era.

72 modest increases in antiplatelet therapy and coronary revascularization after implementation in patie

73 re the timing, frequency, and type of repeat coronary revascularization among patients receiving BIMA

74 trated a significant reduction in subsequent coronary revascularization among patients with stable an

75 dical therapy compared with 24.8% for prompt coronary revascularization among the 381 coronary artery

76 lacks are less likely than whites to receive coronary revascularization and evidence-based therapies

77 the 2009 Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) for Coronary Revascularization and in-hospital mortality, bl

78 AKI is common after multivessel coronary revascularization and is more likely after CABG

79 vascularization is comparable to rates after coronary revascularization and lower extremity amputatio

80 ut CT angiography was a better predictor for coronary revascularization and MACE and showed better ag

81 80 and less served as a better predictor for coronary revascularization and MACE than stenosis of 50%

82 thermore, the predictive value of CT FFR for coronary revascularization and major adverse cardiac eve

83 Clinical outcomes between coronary revascularization and medical treatment without

84 in death or acute coronary syndrome between coronary revascularization and no revascularization in t

85 er acute myocardial infarction for unplanned coronary revascularization and unstable angina (UA) are

86 onary heart death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization) and major vascular events (m

87 farction, other hospitalizations for CHD and coronary revascularization) and quantitative measures of

88 until December 2017 for MI, CHD (i.e., MI or coronary revascularization), and in Medicare for all-cau

89 ts of myocardial infarction hospitalization, coronary revascularization, and all-cause mortality.

90 myocardial infarction (MI), angina, need for coronary revascularization, and cardiac death.

91 l serious cardiovascular events (MI, stroke, coronary revascularization, and cardiovascular death) in

92 le angina, recognized myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, and coronary death.

93 was the composite of myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, and death from any cause.

94 splantation, nonfatal myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, and heart failure hospitaliz

95 all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, and hospitalization because

96 rials: death, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, and hospitalization for angi

97 (MACE: death, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, and hospitalization for unst

98 dress the expanding clinical indications for coronary revascularization, and in an effort to align th

99 ardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, and ischemic stroke).

100 infarction (MI), refractory angina requiring coronary revascularization, and ischemic stroke.

101 s were a history of diabetes, heart failure, coronary revascularization, and larger hospital size.

102 dex, total number of coronary lesions, prior coronary revascularization, and left ventricular ejectio

103 incidence of cardiac events, little need for coronary revascularization, and low spending on subseque

104 ding) was also similar following peripheral, coronary revascularization, and lower extremity amputati

105 th particular focus on coronary angiography, coronary revascularization, and mechanical support.

106 ardial infarction, an increased incidence of coronary revascularization, and no effect in all-cause m

107 on of AMI, elective percutaneous or surgical coronary revascularization, and other cardiovascular sur

108 erosclerosis risk factors, coronary calcium, coronary revascularization, and peripheral vascular dise

109 iovascular mortality, nonfatal reinfarction, coronary revascularization, and readmission for heart fa

110 ction (composite end point), ischemia-driven coronary revascularization, and spontaneous myocardial i

111 cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, and stroke through December

112 the primary endpoint by symptoms, diagnosis, coronary revascularizations, and preventative therapies.

113 cluding robotic-assisted surgery; and hybrid coronary revascularization are discussed.

114 tion strategy, and ways to prevent AKI after coronary revascularization are needed.

115 The rate of repeat coronary revascularization at 1 year was 1.4% in the off

116 lization for evaluation of possible AMI, and coronary revascularization at 30 days.

117 The appropriateness for coronary revascularization at the time of coronary angio

118 yocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, coronary revascularization, atrial fibrillation, or CVD

119 In prior coronary revascularization AUC documents, indications fo

120 As seen with the prior coronary revascularization AUC, revascularization in cli

121 rivate insurance were more likely to receive coronary revascularization before and after reform.

122 comes in all diabetic patients who underwent coronary revascularization between 2007 and 2014 (n = 4,

123 rdance in assessments of appropriateness for coronary revascularization between physicians and the AU

124 first CHD event (acute coronary syndrome or coronary revascularization) between 2000 and 2008 in an

125 y injury (AKI) is a known complication after coronary revascularization, but few studies have directl

126 cardiac death is deferred for 90 days after coronary revascularization, but mortality may be highest

127 gagement in shared decision-making regarding coronary revascularization, but studies demonstrate poor

128 Coronary revascularization by CABG compared with PCI is

129 for the secondary outcomes including stroke, coronary revascularization, cardiovascular mortality, an

130 tcomes included any stroke, ischemic stroke, coronary revascularization, cardiovascular mortality, an

131 placebo, 1.5%; HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.34-1.76]; coronary revascularization: chelation, 15%; placebo, 18%

132 predicted outcomes and the effectiveness of coronary revascularization compared with medical therapy

133 ous myocardial infarction or ischemia-driven coronary revascularization (composite end point), cardio

134 Among CKD patients undergoing coronary revascularization, death is more frequent than

135 Coronary revascularization decisions for patients with C

136 STEMI and the lack of coronary revascularization determined an increased risk.

137 Routine coronary revascularization does not reduce perioperative

138 t ischemia with rehospitalization, or urgent coronary revascularization during index hospitalization)

139 y outcome rate and a >10-fold higher rate of coronary revascularization during the first year after C

140 eous coronary intervention (MS-PCI) complete coronary revascularization during the index hospitalizat

141 OMT was underused in patients treated with coronary revascularization, especially CABG.

142 ular end point, the composite end point plus coronary revascularization (expanded composite of cardio

143 ac surgery on myocardial infarction (MI) and coronary revascularization following coronary stenting.

144 free from any myocardial infarction (MI) or coronary revascularization for >1 year at inclusion.

145 rt disease, myocardial infarction, or urgent coronary revascularization for myocardial ischemia) and

146 ary heart disease (CHD) death, MI, or urgent coronary revascularization for myocardial ischemia.

147 y selected cTn+ patients who underwent early coronary revascularization for obstructive coronary arte

148 eral, as seen with the prior AUC, the use of coronary revascularization for patients with acute coron

149 ion strategies for atherosclerosis following coronary revascularization for patients with and without

150 outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization for small vessel disease.

151 ns face in determining the optimal method of coronary revascularization for this high-risk population

152 te of the appropriate use criteria (AUC) for coronary revascularization frequently considered.

153 3 patients with AMI who underwent inhospital coronary revascularization from January 2007 to December

154 acetylcysteine, sodium bicarbonate, off-pump coronary revascularization, goal-directed hemodynamic th

155 een the intensive medical therapy and prompt coronary revascularization groups were seen in any risk

156 able angina [UA] leading to hospitalization, coronary revascularization >/=30 days post-randomization

157 ted outpatients with stable CAD (i.e., MI or coronary revascularization >1 year previously).

158 unstable angina requiring rehospitalization, coronary revascularization (>/=30 days after randomizati

159 of mortality, myocardial infarction, or late coronary revascularization (>/=90 days after CCTA) were

160 2.45; 95% CI, 1.98-3.03; P < .001), whereas coronary revascularization had a negative relationship w

161 Use of cardioprotective medication after coronary revascularization has been inconsistent and rel

162 AUC for coronary revascularization have been developed by select

163 Although appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization have been developed to improv

164 uding time-varying myocardial infarction and coronary revascularization (hazard ratios: SB, 1.00, 1.1

165 Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines arterial coron

166 Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines both.

167 Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines minimally inva

168 Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) involves a combination

169 Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) treats multivessel coro

170 I, recurrent CHD events (ie, recurrent MI or coronary revascularization), heart failure hospitalizati

171 events, hemorrhagic stroke, ischemic stroke, coronary revascularization, heart failure, total mortali

172 The clinical significance of incomplete coronary revascularization (ICR) after percutaneous coro

173 lication of the Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization in 2009, there have been sign

174 on myocardial infarction patients undergoing coronary revascularization in an 8-hospital network were

175 BG may be preferred over PCI for multivessel coronary revascularization in appropriately selected pat

176 re, high blood urea nitrogen, and history of coronary revascularization in both data sets (all P<0.05

177 tial underutilization and overutilization of coronary revascularization in contemporary clinical prac

178 ing Stents and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization in Daily Practice (COMPARE) t

179 The study assessed the appropriateness of coronary revascularization in Ontario, Canada, and exami

180 Further adjustment for coronary revascularization in our models significantly a

181 of clarity exists about the role of complete coronary revascularization in patients presenting with n

182 ronary artery disease may worsen and require coronary revascularization in patients with risk factors

183 ents undergoing surgical versus percutaneous coronary revascularization in the era of drug-eluting st

184 survival of DM patients with MVD undergoing coronary revascularization in the FREEDOM trial.

185 There were no deaths, AMIs, or coronary revascularizations in either group.

186 yl reduced the need for first and subsequent coronary revascularizations in statin-treated patients w

187 after a CHD event (myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization) in 2007, 2008, or 2009.

188 Among dialysis patients undergoing coronary revascularization, in-hospital mortality was hi

189 inical outcomes with the use of FFR to guide coronary revascularization, including a reduction in car

190 ibit a remarkable ability to regenerate, and coronary revascularization initiates within hours of inj

191 Coronary revascularization is accomplished either by per

192 Coronary revascularization is an effective means of trea

193 Underutilization of coronary revascularization is associated with significan

194 nvasive treatment strategy, in which routine coronary revascularization is performed, or a conservati

195 se in high-risk patients undergoing surgical coronary revascularization is still a matter of debate.

196 ardial infarction patients, complete 1-stage coronary revascularization is superior to multistage PCI

197 heart disease, but the optimal strategy for coronary revascularization is unknown.

198 In patients with severe CAC who require coronary revascularization, IVL was safely performed wit

199 arction (kappa, 0.71-0.74) and excellent for coronary revascularization (kappa, 0.88-0.91).

200 oke, hospitalization for unstable angina, or coronary revascularization), key secondary endpoint (car

201 nt of fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide coronary revascularization lags despite robust supportiv

202 ores in the mid-range (4 to 6) indicate that coronary revascularization may be appropriate for the cl

203 missing significantly fewer days of work for coronary revascularization (mean difference, -37.7 days;

204 ith regard to invasive coronary angiography, coronary revascularization, nonfatal myocardial infarcti

205 terval, 0.95-1.84; P=0.09) and higher use of coronary revascularizations (odds ratio, 1.77; 95% confi

206 s coronary intervention in the guidelines on coronary revascularization of the European Society of Ca

207 ysis was performed to evaluate the effect of coronary revascularization on event-free survival.

208 l myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or coronary revascularization or death from cardiovascular

209 hock remains unacceptably high despite early coronary revascularization or other therapies.

210 te of coronary death, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization or presumed ischaemic stroke)

211 nfatal myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke, coronary revascularization, or cardiovascular death, ass

212 ular outcomes (death, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, or cerebrovascular events) i

213 nary syndrome without myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, or CHD death.

214 oronary events (i.e., myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, or death from ischemic heart

215 stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina, coronary revascularization, or heart failure occurred in

216 bined primary endpoint of death, MI, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for angin

217 ity,recurrent myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for angin

218 mary end point (death, reinfarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for angin

219 s time to total death, recurrent MI, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for angin

220 te of total mortality, recurrent MI, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for angin

221 atal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unsta

222 atal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unsta

223 k of unstable angina, myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, or stoke.

224 myocardial infarction, acute renal failure, coronary revascularization, or stroke within 90 days pos

225 , acute MI or other acute coronary syndrome, coronary revascularization, or stroke) associated with t

226 ular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, or stroke, assessed 12 month

227 atal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina requiring

228 atal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina.

229 angina, congestive heart failure, emergency coronary revascularization, or urgent implantable cardio

230 ntensive medical therapy versus 27.1% prompt coronary revascularization; P=0.010; hazard ratio=2.10;

231 igher early compared to late mortality after coronary revascularization, particularly after PCI.

232 on (PCI) for patients undergoing multivessel coronary revascularization-particularly among patients w

233 efinition for "clinically relevant MI" after coronary revascularization (PCI or CABG), which is appli

234 ng clopidogrel >12 months after percutaneous coronary revascularization (PCI).

235 as coronary death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization-per 10-mg/dL lower concentrat

236 A total of 2661 patients underwent 3062 coronary revascularization, peripheral revascularization

237 ents with type 2 diabetes mellitus to prompt coronary revascularization plus intensive medical therap

238 At baseline presentation, 91.2% underwent coronary revascularization, predominantly for acute MI (

239 of cardiovascular events either following a coronary revascularization procedure (percutaneous coron

240 Recurrent MI, CHD events (recurrent MI or a coronary revascularization procedure), and mortality wer

241 rwise uncomplicated myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization procedure.

242 fies all Medicare beneficiaries undergoing a coronary revascularization procedure: coronary artery by

243 nts is currently the most commonly performed coronary revascularization procedure; hence, optimizing

244 P=0.009) and required a higher rate of late coronary revascularization procedures (PCI: Mod-CAD vs.

245 healthcare reform in Massachusetts on use of coronary revascularization procedures and in-hospital an

246 Reducing insurance barriers to receipt of coronary revascularization procedures has not yet elimin

247 on the trends in the volume and outcomes of coronary revascularization procedures performed on Medic

248 rimary composite outcome, the rate of repeat coronary revascularization, quality of life, or neurocog

249 ital claims data, we compared differences in coronary revascularization rates (coronary artery bypass

250 Prespecified analyses examined all coronary revascularizations, recurrent revascularization

251 of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization related to the target SVG dur

252 ng all Medicare beneficiaries undergoing any coronary revascularization remained between 2.1% and 2.2

253 eral studies in patients undergoing surgical coronary revascularization report reduced release of cre

254 angiography (RR=0.93; 95% CI, 0.86-0.99) and coronary revascularization (RR = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.71-0.87

255 95% CI: 0.68 to 0.90; p = 0.001), and repeat coronary revascularization (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.65 to 0.

256 more patients with significant CAD requiring coronary revascularization, shorten hospital stay, or al

257 Coronary revascularization should be reserved for those

258 rebrovascular events of 2 different complete coronary revascularization strategies in patients with n

259 ll future comparative studies of comparative coronary revascularization strategies.

260 and renal failure according to the different coronary revascularization strategies.

261 This study sought to determine the optimal coronary revascularization strategy in patients with dia

262 The optimal coronary revascularization strategy in patients with sta

263 reserve (FFR) on the reclassification of the coronary revascularization strategy on individual patien

264 There was no interaction between sex and coronary revascularization strategy regarding mortality

265 for AKI should be considered when choosing a coronary revascularization strategy, and ways to prevent

266 Regardless of coronary revascularization strategy, medication adherenc

267 g of myocardial infarction, angina, need for coronary revascularization, stroke, or cardiac death.

268 incident CVD events (myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, stroke, or death), and wheth

269 ath, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, coronary revascularization, stroke, transient ischemic a

270 ehospitalization for unstable angina, repeat coronary revascularization (target vessel revascularizat

271 MRI was associated with a lower incidence of coronary revascularization than FFR and was noninferior

272 er rates of major adverse cardiac events and coronary revascularization than those with normal MPI.

273 Blacks had 30% lower odds of receiving coronary revascularization than whites in the prereform

274 ispensed during the first year after initial coronary revascularization to identify patients who neve

275 e-sponsored, randomized Hybrid Trial (Hybrid Coronary Revascularization Trial) was initiated to exami

276 Because randomized coronary revascularization trials in stable coronary art

277 The hazard ratio for coronary revascularization was 1.09 (95% confidence inte

278 The rate of coronary revascularization was 54% in the uncertain cate

279 Coronary revascularization was associated with a lower a

280 coronary artery bypass graft surgery, prompt coronary revascularization was associated with a signifi

281 sis of 143 individuals with cTn+ AHFS, early coronary revascularization was associated with reduced m

282 ysis of patients undergoing first documented coronary revascularization was conducted using 2 complem

283 Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization were developed to critically

284 plants and those who underwent pretransplant coronary revascularization were excluded.

285 ose who had undergone coronary CTA, rates of coronary revascularization were higher in the first year

286 of diagnostic testing, medical therapy, and coronary revascularization were seen among patients trea

287 ovascular events, myocardial infarction, and coronary revascularization were similar in the study gro

288 sion for myocardial infarction, or unplanned coronary revascularization) were calculated with Kaplan-

289 iac events (death, myocardial infarction, or coronary revascularization), were assessed at 30 days by

290 nical scenario for which the likelihood that coronary revascularization will improve health outcomes

291 In patients with DM and MVD, coronary revascularization with CABG leads to lower all-

292 revascularization compared with percutaneous coronary revascularization with drug-eluting stents (DES

293 utcomes and may predict the effectiveness of coronary revascularization with either coronary artery b

294 on maintenance dialysis who received initial coronary revascularization with either coronary artery b

295 r severe recurrent ischemia requiring urgent coronary revascularization with the principal analysis s

296 sis codes for acute myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization with WHI outcomes adjudicated

297 primary endpoint (22 [9%] patients underwent coronary revascularization within 30 days in the CCTA gr

298 c, quantitative myocardial perfusion by PET, coronary revascularization within 90 d after PET, and al

299 /CT, identifies patients unlikely to undergo coronary revascularization within 90 days of a PET/CT.

300 -matched analysis, we examined whether early coronary revascularization (within 14 days of emergency