ライフサイエンスコーパス: multivessel

1 Of these, 479 underwent multivessel and 761 underwent culprit-only stenting.

2 rafting (CABG) and stenting in patients with multivessel and left main coronary artery disease (CAD)

3 In patients with multivessel and left main coronary artery disease, the d

4 tic and prognostic benefits in patients with multivessel and left main coronary artery disease.

5 standard therapy for patients with advanced multivessel and left main coronary artery disease.

6 esterolemia, renal impairment, diabetes, and multivessel and left main disease (all p <= 0.0001).

7 ents with proximal left anterior descending, multivessel and left main-stem coronary artery disease (

8 d safety of a small thoracotomy approach for multivessel and single-vessel revascularization.

9 survival to stenting for most patients with multivessel and/or left main stem CAD, as well as a sign

10 peat revascularization in most patients with multivessel and/or left main stem CAD.

11 es >/=66 years of age who underwent isolated multivessel CABG between 1988 and 2008, and we documente

12 aim of this study was to investigate whether multivessel CABG compared with PCI as an initial revascu

13 Multivessel CABG is associated with lower long-term mort

14 In patients with multivessel CAD and diabetes, CABG was associated with i

15 Patients with multivessel CAD and NSTE-ACS that underwent percutaneous

16 Multivessel CAD and residual uncontrolled risk factors a

17 CAD are best treated with PCI, patients with multivessel CAD have a higher ischemia burden, a greater

18 In patients with multivessel CAD presenting with NSTE-ACS, multivessel in

19 ediction tool for patients with diabetes and multivessel CAD that could be used in shared decision-ma

20 tes risk for adverse events in patients with multivessel CAD undergoing PCI.

21 We randomized 87 patients with multivessel CAD undergoing percutaneous coronary interve

22 95 to June 2005, 1,240 patients with ACS and multivessel CAD underwent percutaneous coronary interven

23 The sensitivity and specificity for multivessel CAD was 87.4% and 73.0%.

24 it-lesion PCI, 4,041 patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD were randomized to staged nonculprit-les

25 g 5,034 subjects, 15% had LVEF <50%, 77% had multivessel CAD, and 28% had proximal left anterior desc

26 comparing treatments in patients with stable multivessel CAD, and preserved systolic ventricular func

27 For patients with diabetes and multivessel CAD, CABG surgery provided slightly better i

28 For patients with diabetes and multivessel CAD, CABG surgery should be recommended as s

29 effects model identified an association with multivessel CAD, compared with those with single-vessel

30 moking, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, multivessel CAD, diabetes with glycosylated hemoglobin >

31 In cases of ULMD, multivessel CAD, or LVD, CABG surgery should be favored

32 should be recommended in patients with ULMD, multivessel CAD, or LVD, if the severity of coronary dis

33 th and without ischemia were similar in age, multivessel CAD, previous myocardial infarction, LV EF,

34 erve with PET can assist in the diagnosis of multivessel CAD.

35 predicts outcome after PCI in patients with multivessel CAD.

36 an added advantage over SPECT for evaluating multivessel CAD.

37 however, less likely to have higher grade or multivessel CAD.

38 . mearnsii showed both the highest number of multivessel cavitation events and the highest degree of

39 amined the safety and efficacy of nonculprit multivessel compared with culprit-only stenting in patie

40 f internal mammary graft use in contemporary multivessel coronary artery bypass graft (CABG).

41 ond arterial conduit improves outcomes after multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting remains uncl

42 ched cohorts who underwent primary, isolated multivessel coronary artery bypass grafting with the lef

43 .001 for all), but only modest increases in multivessel coronary artery disease (43.7% in 2010 and 4

44 In patients presenting with NSTE-ACS, multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) is associated

45 better than the classic SS in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing per

46 on 10-year survival of patients with stable multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) who were rando

47 In patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD), the FREEDOM (

48 rafting (CABG) in patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD).

49 elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD).

50 intervention (PCI) in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MV-CAD).

51 Among patients who had multivessel coronary artery disease and acute myocardial

52 on), both implanted in the same patient with multivessel coronary artery disease and chronic kidney d

53 rgery Study (MASS II) included patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and normal systolic

54 , MA-CABG represents the optimal therapy for multivessel coronary artery disease and should be enthus

55 al versus percutaneous revascularization for multivessel coronary artery disease are often based on s

56 nfarction who had angiography, demonstrating multivessel coronary artery disease between July 2008 an

57 brid coronary revascularization (HCR) treats multivessel coronary artery disease by combining a minim

58 ary coronary artery bypass graft surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease from 1993 to 2009.

59 f the left internal mammary artery (LIMA) in multivessel coronary artery disease improves survival af

60 ase of the successful treatment of unstable, multivessel coronary artery disease in a child with PCI

61 ed FREEDOM (Comparison of Two Treatments for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease in Individuals With

62 he FREEDOM (Comparison of Two Treatments for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease in Individuals With

63 T00006305) (Comparison of Two Treatments for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease in Individuals With

64 (Comparison of Two Treatments for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease in Individuals With

65 Revascularization strategies for multivessel coronary artery disease include percutaneous

66 c patients with acute coronary syndromes and multivessel coronary artery disease is uncertain.

67 -segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease may benefit more fro

68 dard treatment in many patients with complex multivessel coronary artery disease or left main disease

69 ngle-institution, primary revascularization, multivessel coronary artery disease patients: 2,207 BMS-

70 Among patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease presenting with non-

71 complicating acute myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease should not be treate

72 HCR is increasingly used to treat multivessel coronary artery disease that includes stenos

73 rial, we assigned patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease to undergo either PC

74 clinical outcomes of diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease treated with fractio

75 Among patients with multivessel coronary artery disease treated with PCI or

76 In patients with STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing infarct-a

77 among patients with unprotected left main or multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutane

78 ry intervention for unprotected left main or multivessel coronary artery disease were identified at 2

79 80 patients undergoing revascularization for multivessel coronary artery disease were identified.

80 Twenty-three patients with known multivessel coronary artery disease were prospectively e

81 10, 1900 patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease were randomized to P

82 Patients (aged >/= 18 years) with multivessel coronary artery disease were randomly assign

83 complicating acute myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease were randomly assign

84 We randomly assigned patients with STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease who had undergone su

85 T angiographic examinations in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who underwent corona

86 of 888 patients with stable single-vessel or multivessel coronary artery disease with reduced fractio

87 Treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease with traditional sin

88 ffer significantly from those of trials with multivessel coronary artery disease without left main LM

89 Among 1013 subjects with multivessel coronary artery disease, 218 (22%) were deem

90 of patients undergoing revascularization for multivessel coronary artery disease, a long-term benefit

91 plex bifurcation and ostial branch stenoses, multivessel coronary artery disease, and left main steno

92 infarction, multiple myocardial infarctions, multivessel coronary artery disease, and lower extremity

93 th ischemic left ventricular dysfunction and multivessel coronary artery disease, CABG plus medical t

94 such as patients with diabetes and advanced, multivessel coronary artery disease, CABG remains the st

95 In diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, CABG was associated

96 ng patients with ST-segment elevation MI and multivessel coronary artery disease, complete revascular

97 Among patients with STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease, complete revascular

98 at among patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease, coronary artery byp

99 In diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, coronary artery byp

100 Among patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, CR may be the optim

101 ) and late coronary atherosclerosis (severe, multivessel coronary artery disease, n = 29).

102 rs enrolled adult patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease, randomised them to

103 CABG and PCI in most patient subgroups with multivessel coronary artery disease, so choice of treatm

104 In patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease, the rate of major a

105 CI has shown to improve clinical outcomes in multivessel coronary artery disease, though its impact i

106 ation choices for diabetic patients who have multivessel coronary artery disease, we combine the resu

107 ascularisation in patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease, who account for 25%

108 HCR is rarely performed for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

109 (PCI) in patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease.

110 n in the treatment of a particular subset of multivessel coronary artery disease.

111 ent elevation myocardial infarction (MI) and multivessel coronary artery disease.

112 atients who have chronic kidney disease with multivessel coronary artery disease.

113 egarding the benefits of CR in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

114 -PCI for patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease.

115 lete revascularization (IR) in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

116 tion approach for patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease.

117 d catheter-based procedures for treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease.

118 cutaneous revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

119 ion and coronary-artery bypass grafting, and multivessel coronary artery disease.

120 on of current technology in the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease.

121 arization strategy in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

122 -segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease: 1-stage percutaneou

123 outcomes of two competing interventions for multivessel coronary artery disease: coronary-artery byp

124 Methods Patients with established multivessel coronary atherosclerosis underwent (18)F-flu

125 for patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and multivessel coronary disease (MVD), coronary artery bypa

126 to patients who underwent isolated CABG for multivessel coronary disease in New York.

127 neous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary disease is one of those rare situat

128 ntervention with coronary bypass surgery for multivessel coronary disease mandate that surgeons reeva

129 dy, we found that, among older patients with multivessel coronary disease that did not require emerge

130 Patients with multivessel coronary disease treated with coronary arter

131 Patients with multivessel coronary disease were recruited into a rando

132 ients with previous myocardial infarction or multivessel coronary disease who additionally had either

133 y intervention with unprotected left main or multivessel coronary disease, even after adjustment for

134 instead of coronary artery bypass graft) for multivessel coronary disease, repetitive transcranial ma

135 vention (PCI) are alternative treatments for multivessel coronary disease.

136 AKI is common after multivessel coronary revascularization and is more likel

137 gest that CABG may be preferred over PCI for multivessel coronary revascularization in appropriately

138 y intervention (PCI) for patients undergoing multivessel coronary revascularization-particularly amon

139 der the curve, 0.88 versus 0.73; P<0.001) or multivessel disease (area under the curve, 0.98 versus 0

140 he predictors of 30-day readmission included multivessel disease (odds ratio [OR], 1.97; 95% CI, 1.65

141 ith Diabetes mellitus: Optimal management of Multivessel disease [FREEDOM]; NCT00086450).

142 t-Only Revascularization Strategies to Treat Multivessel Disease after Early PCI for STEMI (COMPLETE)

143 coronary artery disease in both single- and multivessel disease and detects more subendocardial isch

144 Patients with multivessel disease and severe left ventricular systolic

145 Among patients with multivessel disease and severe left ventricular systolic

146 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for multivessel disease and severe left ventricular systolic

147 of ICR to adverse outcomes in patients with multivessel disease and stable ischaemic heart disease,

148 particularly in patients with more extensive multivessel disease and the greatest degree of left vent

149 occurred within the context of a decline in multivessel disease and thus likely reflect the natural

150 t of 2013) of those patients identified with multivessel disease at NCDR sites had had 0- or 1-vessel

151 ascularisation of patients with diabetes and multivessel disease by CABG decreases long-term mortalit

152 risk (RR) 0.68 (95% CI, 0.45-1.03); P=0.07; multivessel disease following ST-segment-elevation myoca

153 clinical trial evaluated STEMI patients with multivessel disease having PPCI within 12 h of symptom o

154 -segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease is associated with better outcomes t

155 the early phase post-STEMI in patients with multivessel disease is safe.

156 -segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease is uncertain.

157 te and high-risk acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease managed with percutaneous coronary i

158 sought to determine if patients with T1D and multivessel disease may benefit from CABG compared with

159 Data from multivessel disease patients in New York's cardiac surge

160 ew York's cardiac registry identified 63,402 multivessel disease patients undergoing coronary artery

161 revascularization strategy in patients with multivessel disease presenting with cardiogenic shock co

162 aneous coronary intervention (PPCI) who have multivessel disease presenting with ST-segment elevation

163 with culprit-only stenting in patients with multivessel disease presenting with unstable angina or n

164 n strategy in diabetic patients with complex multivessel disease remains controversial.

165 A total of 60 patients with multivessel disease requiring staged procedure at 1 mont

166 nt elevation myocardial infarction (MI) with multivessel disease results in lower major adverse cardi

167 PET is well suited to patients with multivessel disease to confirm or exclude balanced ischa

168 revascularization in patients with high-risk multivessel disease to optimize their long-term clinical

169 ic patients with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease treated with PCI rather than CABG ha

170 gle arterial grafts (SAGs) for patients with multivessel disease undergoing coronary artery bypass gr

171 ltivessel intervention in 3984 patients with multivessel disease undergoing primary percutaneous coro

172 levation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease was dependent on the presence of 3-v

173 The rate of angiographic multivessel disease was similar in the angiography-guide

174 tion with everolimus eluting stent (EES) for multivessel disease were included.

175 Diabetes mellitus and multivessel disease were more often present in the later

176 optimal management of patients found to have multivessel disease while undergoing primary percutaneou

177 ction, and heart failure among patients with multivessel disease who are undergoing coronary artery b

178 andomly assigned 885 patients with STEMI and multivessel disease who had undergone primary PCI of an

179 We identified patients with multivessel disease who received drug-eluting stents or

180 a randomized clinical trial in patients with multivessel disease who underwent a successful percutane

181 y, we compared the outcomes in patients with multivessel disease who underwent CABG with the outcomes

182 In patients with STEMI and multivessel disease who underwent primary PCI of an infa

183 ional databases show a survival advantage in multivessel disease with coronary artery bypass grafting

184 sease undergoing index revascularization for multivessel disease with either DES or isolated CABG (n=

185 y (ACUITY) trial, 1772 diabetic patients had multivessel disease with left anterior descending artery

186 ith Diabetes Mellitus: Optimal Management of Multivessel Disease) trial demonstrated that for patient

187 ith Diabetes Mellitus: Optimal Management of Multivessel Disease) trial demonstrated that, on average

188 ith Diabetes mellitus: Optimal management of Multivessel disease) trial, we compared patients receivi

189 ith Diabetes Mellitus: Optimal Management of Multivessel Disease) with prior probability distribution

190 (131 had single-vessel disease [SVD]; 30 had multivessel disease), and 310 (60.1%) had >/=50% stenosi

191 g 16,089 patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel disease, 8096 patients with similar propensi

192 luding older age, extreme body mass indexes, multivessel disease, a lower ejection fraction, unstable

193 l, we randomly assigned 706 patients who had multivessel disease, acute myocardial infarction, and ca

194 presenting with acute myocardial infarction, multivessel disease, and cardiogenic shock.

195 yocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, and multivessel disease, and were associated with higher mor

196 rity of patients with cardiogenic shock have multivessel disease, and whether PCI should be performed

197 PCI are performed in older patients to treat multivessel disease, but their comparative effectiveness

198 For patients with multivessel disease, CABG continues to be associated wit

199 ment-elevation acute coronary syndromes with multivessel disease, choice of revascularization modalit

200 In patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel disease, coronary artery bypass graft surger

201 ICERs, including patients with >1 prior MI, multivessel disease, diabetes, renal dysfunction (all wi

202 In patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel disease, EES was associated with lower upfro

203 In patients presenting for P-PCI with multivessel disease, index admission complete revascular

204 rvention (PCI) in patients with diabetes and multivessel disease, managed with or without insulin.

205 atients with acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease, multivessel percutaneous coronary i

206 were age, anemia, congestive heart failure, multivessel disease, number of stents implanted, and use

207 rt failure than white men but lower rates of multivessel disease, prior coronary artery bypass graft

208 it vessel-only PCI (CO-PCI) in patients with multivessel disease, ST-segment-elevation myocardial inf

209 -segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease, stress echocardiography-guided reva

210 Killip class >/=2, baseline thrombocytosis, multivessel disease, symptom onset-to-balloon time, and

211 Among STEMI patients with multivessel disease, the benefit of complete revasculari

212 entation, diabetes mellitus, current smoker, multivessel disease, treatment of an in-stent restenotic

213 ase, history of peripheral vascular disease, multivessel disease, widowhood, and lack of private insu

214 h single-vessel disease, and 22 (25.3%) with multivessel disease.

215 morbidities, including cardiogenic shock and multivessel disease.

216 rm safety of FFR-guided PCI in patients with multivessel disease.

217 onary intervention (PCI) among patients with multivessel disease.

218 ete revascularization (ICR) in patients with multivessel disease.

219 segment-elevation myocardial infarction have multivessel disease.

220 -segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease.

221 nosis in patients with cardiogenic shock and multivessel disease.

222 ion, silent ischemia, history of stroke, and multivessel disease.

223 s had left main (LM) disease with or without multivessel disease.

224 elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) have multivessel disease.

225 With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Disease: Treatment of Culprit Lesion Only or

226 -segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease; and the ST-segment-elevation myocar

227 actional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation (FAME) 2 trial demonstrated a sig

228 actional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation (FAME) study demonstrated signifi

229 actional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation (FAME) study, fractional flow res

230 ractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography in Multivessel Evaluation 2) in whom no revascularization w

231 actional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) compared PCI guided by fractiona

232 actional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study.

233 (Fractional Flow Reserve or Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation).

234 nter study (FAME [FFR versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation]) found that a physiologically-gu

235 or detecting CAD in patients with single and multivessel (> or =2 vessels) disease was 92% (22 of 24,

236 of culprit-vessel intervention (CVI) versus multivessel intervention at the time of primary percutan

237 We compared CVI versus multivessel intervention in 3984 patients with multivess

238 Multivessel intervention was associated with lower death

239 th multivessel CAD presenting with NSTE-ACS, multivessel intervention was significantly associated wi

240 ients underwent shorter procedures with less multivessel intervention.

241 ith left anterior descending, left main, and multivessel involvement, which leads to a high incidence

242 se outcomes among women than men with severe multivessel/LM CAD.

243 This operation could potentially make multivessel minimally invasive coronary surgery safe, ef

244 (Impact of Different Treatment in Multivessel Non ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction [NSTE

245 the SMILE (Impact of Different Treatment in Multivessel Non ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patie

246 In multivessel non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarcti

247 evealed <50% stenosis in all major arteries, multivessel OCT was performed, followed by CMR (cine ima

248 ent-elevation myocardial infarction, and had multivessel or left main disease.

249 in symptomatic patients with severe, complex multivessel, or left main disease, some patients present

250 ulti-Link Vision Coronary Stents in the Same Multivessel Patient with Chronic Kidney Disease (RENAL-D

251 cadmium zinc telluride camera in a cohort of multivessel patients and its pertinence with respect to

252 ic estimations of global and regional MPR in multivessel patients using a cadmium zinc telluride came

253 35.7%, previous myocardial infarction 74.8%, multivessel PCI 38.0%).

254 -effectiveness of HCR compared with CABG and multivessel PCI alone.

255 on (n=15,845), 3,576 patients (22.4%) having multivessel PCI experienced a significantly higher risk

256 ents undergoing clinically indicated HCR and multivessel PCI for hybrid-eligible coronary artery dise

257 nd in 189 of the 341 patients (55.4%) in the multivessel PCI group (relative risk, 0.83; 95% confiden

258 t-lesion-only PCI group as compared with the multivessel PCI group was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.98; P=

259 -SHOCK trial (Culprit Lesion Only PCI Versus Multivessel PCI in Cardiogenic Shock) demonstrated super

260 -SHOCK trial (Culprit Lesion Only PCI versus Multivessel PCI in Cardiogenic Shock), patients were gro

261 CK trial (The Culprit Lesion Only PCI Versus Multivessel PCI in Cardiogenic Shock), patients with CS

262 sociated with lower long-term mortality than multivessel PCI in the community setting.

263 Multivessel PCI in the setting of STEMI leads to a small

264 action between the experimental strategy and multivessel PCI on the primary endpoint (hazard ratio: 0

265 over 12 months between patients treated with multivessel PCI or HCR, an emerging modality.

266 Over 18 months, 200 HCR and 98 multivessel PCI patients were enrolled at 11 sites.

267 Nonetheless, multivessel PCI remains a common revascularization strat

268 These results indicate that FFR guidance of multivessel PCI should be the standard of care in most p

269 rization of nonculprit lesions, or immediate multivessel PCI.

270 ding 1,330 (79%) single-vessel and 345 (21%) multivessel PCI.

271 tiated to examine whether HCR is superior to multivessel PCI.

272 y 12-month aspirin monotherapy) according to multivessel PCI.

273 ischemic and bleeding risks in patients with multivessel PCI.

274 nly than among those who underwent immediate multivessel PCI.

275 Studies comparing immediate/single-stage multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI)

276 t treatment regimens in patients who undergo multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are

277 oronary artery disease may benefit more from multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) com

278 ple Grove, Minnesota) in de novo single- and multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

279 , whereas 55% of women and 55% of men in the multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention group.

280 outcomes at 1 year in patients randomized to multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention guided by

281 the decision between culprit artery-only and multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patien

282 ome for culprit-lesion-only versus immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patien

283 een upgraded to a class IA classification in multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in the gu

284 Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention was assoc

285 ocardial infarction and multivessel disease, multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention was assoc

286 culprit-lesion-only as compared to immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention.

287 tion of the culprit-lesion-only or immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention.

288 all patients with T1D who underwent a first multivessel revascularization in Sweden from 1995 to 201

289 ing (MICS CABG) consists of single-vessel or multivessel revascularization via a small left thoracoto

290 es have shown that among patients undergoing multivessel revascularization, coronary-artery bypass gr

291 red strategy in patients with T1D in need of multivessel revascularization.

292 tients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in need of multivessel revascularization.

293 ction (57% vs. 36%; p = 0.009), left main or multivessel SCAD (24% vs. 5%; p < 0.0001; and 33% vs. 14

294 Multivessel SCAD was found in 23%.

295 cases, left main segment in 36%, and 40% had multivessel spontaneous coronary artery dissection.

296 omplicated with fewer stents implanted, less multivessel stenting, less thrombus, and less no-reflow.

297 ternative to open coronary bypass surgery or multivessel stenting.

298 ortuosity including corkscrew appearance and multivessel symmetrical tortuosity were associated with

299 There were significantly higher rates of multivessel thrombosis, stent thrombosis, higher modifie

300 f coronary artery disease (single vessel vs. multivessel vs. left main) did not affect the relative i