コーパス検索結果 (１語後でソート)
通し番号をクリックするとPubMedの該当ページを表示します
1 ST (occurring </=24 hours after percutaneous coronary intervention).
2 eference of bypass surgery over percutaneous coronary intervention.
3 r chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention.
4 al ancillary therapy in primary percutaneous coronary intervention.
5 metal in-stent restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention.
6 ompared with clopidogrel during percutaneous coronary intervention.
7 iography with intent to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention.
8 t therapy in patients following percutaneous coronary intervention.
9 e desensitization after primary percutaneous coronary intervention.
10 among MI patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention.
11 tcomes of patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention.
12 rsus EES in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
13 ery intervention during primary percutaneous coronary intervention.
14 l infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.
15 stic angiography before primary percutaneous coronary intervention.
16 AD patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention.
17 Interventions: Percutaneous coronary intervention.
18 te coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
19 atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
20 logical lesion assessment after percutaneous coronary intervention.
21 ST within 4 hours after primary percutaneous coronary intervention.
22 omplete revascularisation after percutaneous coronary intervention.
23 ing in patients not amenable to percutaneous coronary intervention.
24 omplications and mortality post percutaneous coronary intervention.
25 atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
26 among SCAD patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
27 rted mortality statistics after percutaneous coronary intervention.
28 s of quality of care in primary percutaneous coronary intervention.
29 o improve long-term outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention.
30 ed myocardial reperfusion after percutaneous coronary intervention.
31 atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
32 iography with intent to perform percutaneous coronary intervention.
33 yocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
34 odynamic instability, or failed percutaneous coronary intervention.
35 d patient population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
36 r or not they were treated with percutaneous coronary intervention.
37 yocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
38 st-operative stroke compared to percutaneous coronary intervention.
39 rognosis in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
40 ) is a frequent cause of hospitalization and coronary interventions.
41 dromes and for those undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions.
42 ween 2 and 5 days after primary percutaneous coronary interventions.
43 and inhibition of platelet activation after coronary interventions.
44 n patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary interventions.
45 nt for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary interventions.
46 nfarction in the era of primary percutaneous coronary interventions.
47 infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary interventions.
48 l heart interventions (1.0 to 5.2 per 1000), coronary interventions (1.0 to 2.4 per 1000), pacemaker/
49 oronary artery disease: 1-stage percutaneous coronary intervention (1S-PCI) during the index procedur
50 echanical support (28%), urgent percutaneous coronary intervention (28%), urgent coronary artery bypa
51 iography (14.7% vs. 10.1%), and percutaneous coronary intervention (3.8% vs. 2.1%); all p < 0.001 aft
52 n) for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (667,424 procedures performed in 1
54 vascularization procedures were percutaneous coronary interventions (94.2%), and this did not differ
55 as performed within 3 months of percutaneous coronary intervention, adjusted odds of MACE were signif
56 o improve long-term outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention after their complete bioresorption
58 oach to chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention among 1301 procedures performed at
59 ity and clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary interventions among subjects with and without P
60 al Antiplatelet Therapy), after percutaneous coronary intervention and 12 months of thienopyridine (c
63 resonance imaging 5 days after percutaneous coronary intervention and follow-up cardiac magnetic res
64 rse cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention and may additionally have heighten
65 er, who were undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention and presenting less than 12 hours
66 atment of vulnerable plaques by percutaneous coronary intervention and systemic treatment with anti-i
67 ariables (male sex and previous percutaneous coronary intervention) and 4 biomarkers (midkine, adipon
68 raphy, 12 183 (46.2%) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention, and 2832 (10.7%) underwent corona
69 Infarction flow grade <3 after percutaneous coronary intervention, and arterial blood lactate at adm
70 previous myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, and coronary artery bypass grafti
71 xpansion index >/=0.8, previous percutaneous coronary intervention, and higher level of low-density l
72 ipidemia, smoking, a history of percutaneous coronary intervention, and were more than twice as likel
74 TRA has become the dominant percutaneous coronary intervention approach in the United Kingdom, wi
75 Older patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention are at increased risk of periproce
78 llic EES in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention at longest available follow-up.
79 e patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention at our institution between January
80 rforming culprit-vessel primary percutaneous coronary intervention before contralateral or complete d
82 sk among 8952 adults undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention between October 1, 2011, and Septe
83 d with coronary artery stenosis and need for coronary intervention, but not increased mortality or ca
84 al profiles and indications for percutaneous coronary intervention by region in a large global cardio
85 ross the United States with 132 percutaneous coronary intervention-capable hospitals and 946 EMS agen
86 30 patients were transported to percutaneous coronary intervention-capable hospitals, including 974 i
87 ocess of care measures from the percutaneous coronary intervention (CathPCI) and implantable cardiove
89 ork were less likely to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention compared with referent states (adj
90 procedures, structural heart interventions, coronary interventions, computed tomography scans of the
91 ontro L'Infarto-Optimization of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) database collecting cases from 5
92 omplete revascularisation after percutaneous coronary intervention (defined as one or more lesions wi
94 nfarction patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention discharged alive on ADPri therapy
95 mporary chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention, especially among more challenging
96 hybrid chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention, especially when antegrade wiring
97 s and additionally into primary percutaneous coronary intervention, fibrinolysis, or no reperfusion.
98 ronary artery disease underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for a culprit lesion, followed by
99 culprit artery after emergency percutaneous coronary intervention for acute ST-segment-elevation myo
100 atients (127 lesions) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for ISR with BVS implantation.
101 study were patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction, 26.0% o
102 ng and mortality during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardia
103 during chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention for stable angina (CTO-PCI) is a r
104 less likely to receive primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI (77% vs 81%), revascular
105 (Diagnostic Catheterization and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) for coronary angiography and perc
107 ndergoing transport for primary percutaneous coronary intervention from March 10, 2010, through June
108 idated in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention from the PLATelet inhibition and p
109 relief of coronary obstruction, percutaneous coronary intervention has become a standard-of-care proc
110 w marking its 40th anniversary, percutaneous coronary intervention has become one of the most common
112 scularized patients with either percutaneous coronary intervention (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidenc
113 low-risk asymptomatic patients, percutaneous coronary intervention in "screen-positive" patients does
114 undergoing elective and urgent percutaneous coronary intervention in 90 hospitals in 13 countries (A
115 pendent predictor of MACE after percutaneous coronary intervention in a contemporary all-comers cohor
116 at least 18 years who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention in a lesion and had a reference ve
117 PAS [Thrombus Aspiration During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Myocardial Infarction], T
119 s, permitting widespread use of percutaneous coronary intervention in more advanced and complex disea
121 rforation (CP) occurring during percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with a history of coro
122 rit artery-only and multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevat
123 superior to angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in reducing the risk of major adve
124 and bare-metal stents (BMS) for percutaneous coronary intervention in saphenous vein grafts (SVG).
125 T) within 30 days after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment-elevation myocardial
127 coronary artery disease (CAD) assessment and coronary intervention in the prognosis of patients who u
128 y), 4222 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States and Europe be
129 e acute stage, intended primary percutaneous coronary intervention increased from 12% (1995) to 76% (
131 n isolation, and the success of percutaneous coronary intervention is also due to important advances
135 e coronary lesions, IVUS-guided percutaneous coronary intervention is superior to angiography-guided
138 In patients with NSTEMI, percutaneous coronary intervention </=72 hours from admission increas
139 s in patient selection, current percutaneous coronary intervention may allow appropriate patients to
140 ODS AND We reviewed the 10-year percutaneous coronary intervention morbidity and mortality conference
141 ses for conduct of an effective percutaneous coronary intervention morbidity and mortality conference
142 dex procedure versus multistage percutaneous coronary intervention (MS-PCI) complete coronary revascu
143 ediate/single-stage multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI) versus culprit vessel-onl
144 s with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (n=1604; mean age, 61+/-12 years;
145 nd Left Ventricular Function in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Occlusions After ST-Segment Ele
147 or 2.2% undergoing in-hospital percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft su
148 routine revascularization (with percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft su
149 sed revascularization status by percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting
150 ciated with changes in rates of percutaneous coronary intervention or in-hospital mortality in New Yo
151 diate revascularisation through percutaneous coronary intervention (or fibrinolysis), advances in ant
152 peat revascularization (CABG or percutaneous coronary intervention), or nonfatal myocardial infarctio
153 e angina, previous multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention, or previous multi-vessel coronary
154 o of native versus graft vessel percutaneous coronary intervention (P=0.899), or regarding percutaneo
155 l infarction who are undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) according to current practic
157 (n = 20) just prior to emergent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and for an additional 30 min
158 ins a common complication after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and is associated with adver
159 dications used during and after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are contraindicated for spec
162 There are concerns whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) at centers without on-site c
163 tiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) based on the presence or abs
164 determine the incidence of post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) bleeding that occurs on cont
165 rtery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) carries benefits or risks in
166 y benefit more from multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with culprit vessel
167 Previous studies found that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) does not improve outcome com
168 amine access to reperfusion and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) during STEMI using a hub-and
170 rs of long-term mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for radiation-associated cor
171 d bleeding events after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myo
172 Patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment-elevation myo
174 Thrombus aspiration during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of ST-segm
176 iabetic patients after elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not been recently examin
177 al antiplatelet management with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not been well establishe
179 ht to reduce readmissions after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in a large tertiary care fac
180 ss grafting (CABG) surgery over percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in diabetic patients with mu
181 orming coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients resuscitated aft
183 c relief is the primary goal of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in stable angina and is comm
184 oagulant strategies used during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the United States for pat
185 and white patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the Veterans Affairs (VA)
186 ing of the heart during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) induced by repetitive interr
187 idney injury (AKI) complicating percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with adverse c
188 g after hospital discharge from percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with increased
189 Acute kidney injury (AKI) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is common, morbid, and costl
191 rtery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may offer a survival benefit
193 anterior descending artery with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of non-left anterior descend
195 ic valve replacement (TAVR) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the left main coronary ar
196 f short-term readmissions after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on healthcare costs has not
197 therapy (OMT), with or without percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass gr
199 We examined outcomes of CTO percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) post-CABG versus without CAB
200 t hospital stays, most nonacute percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures are reimbursed on
201 imum number to an average of 50 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures performed annuall
202 Dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduces ischemia but increas
203 ural volume and prognosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains uncertain, with some
204 hock from the publicly reported percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) risk-adjusted mortality anal
205 ss testing within 2 years after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to be rarely appropriate, un
206 infarction (STEMI), the use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to restore blood flow in an
207 zed trials, we assessed whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using drug-eluting stents is
208 y artery bypass graft (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using everolimus-eluting ste
209 r chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was developed to improve pro
210 erformed in the same setting if percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was uncomplicated; otherwise
212 FFR) measured immediately after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent plac
213 ft (CABG) surgery compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DE
214 he comparative effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DE
215 ever, some studies suggest that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents may
216 al complexity to undergo either percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with fluoropolymer-based cob
217 atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with placement of stents, st
218 The SYNTAX [Synergy Between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) With Taxus and coronary arte
219 Patients receiving primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 90 min lived 1.08 (SE
220 eft main coronary artery (LMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but the overall picture rem
221 me data for procedures, such as percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), can influence physicians to
222 ations that patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass surg
224 AKI) is common during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), particularly in those with
225 same-day discharge (SDD) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), uptake of this program has
236 recurrent ischemic events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI); however, no long-term, mult
237 Therapy in Subjects Who Require Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] [CHAMPION PHOENIX] [CHAMPION
238 artery bypass graft [CABG], 150 percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], 96 medical therapy only) we
239 trated relatively high rates of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) classified as "inappropria
242 V) beta-blockers before primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) on infarct size and clinica
243 patients reperfused by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) underwent a CMR at 4 +/- 2
247 ETHODS AND We analyzed 1253 CTO percutaneous coronary intervention procedures performed according to
248 ly has led to worse outcomes in percutaneous coronary intervention procedures performed through the t
249 of 235 250 transfemoral access percutaneous coronary intervention procedures was undertaken in all 9
250 omplete revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention, ranolazine's effect on glucose co
251 or defining prognosis and whether preemptive coronary intervention reduces the incidence of cardiovas
252 h aspirin and clopidogrel after percutaneous coronary intervention reduces the risk for coronary thro
255 ng the hybrid algorithm for CTO percutaneous coronary intervention (Registry of CrossBoss and Hybrid
256 grade-only crossing, retrograde percutaneous coronary intervention remains critical for achieving ove
257 fth of MI patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention report 1-year postdischarge angina
261 x patient population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention suggests a new direction in improv
262 vention (P=0.899), or regarding percutaneous coronary intervention target vessels; the most common ta
263 vent at least 1 year before the percutaneous coronary intervention, the efficacy and bleeding profile
264 y survive the first month after percutaneous coronary intervention, their prognosis is comparable to
265 ral complexity, shorter primary percutaneous coronary intervention time was associated with an increa
266 nversely related with time from percutaneous coronary intervention to surgery and is influenced by st
267 etween stent type and time from percutaneous coronary intervention to surgery was independently assoc
268 Patients (n=15 003) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention to SVG in England and Wales during
269 ess clinical outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention to SVG in patients receiving bare-
270 METHODS AND Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention to SVG in the United Kingdom from
273 e being transported for primary percutaneous coronary intervention, treatment with bivalirudin or wit
274 s: One Stage Versus Multistaged Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial, 584 patients were randomly
275 omplete Revascularization after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial, a clinical trial in which
277 n was common (71% and 51%), but percutaneous coronary intervention was low (6.5% and 5.0%) after appr
280 ECLS, coronary angiography, and percutaneous coronary intervention were performed, as appropriate.
281 ction (MI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to prasugrel or ti
282 ete revascularization following percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to ranolazine vers
283 ia, bone fractures, and planned percutaneous coronary intervention were used as the falsification end
284 g diagnostic catheterization or percutaneous coronary interventions were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio
285 Therapy in Subjects Who Require Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) were 3 randomized, double-blind,
286 as the default access site for percutaneous coronary intervention wherever possible in line with cur
287 h-risk lesions benefitting from percutaneous coronary intervention while safely allowing revasculariz
288 lesions, and 46 (84%) of 55 had percutaneous coronary intervention with 2.7 +/- 2.0 stents deployed p
289 d on all patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with BVS implantation for ISR at 7
290 cardiovascular morbidity during percutaneous coronary intervention with DES and with BMS in dialysis
291 fferences in the outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents and in th
292 patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention with stents and were randomized 1:
293 nd defined by a Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SY
295 The SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) sc
297 In the SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) tr
299 ion management involves primary percutaneous coronary intervention, with ongoing studies focusing on
300 rates of ischemic events during percutaneous coronary intervention without an increase in severe blee
WebLSDに未収録の専門用語（用法）は "新規対訳" から投稿できます。