ライフサイエンスコーパス: multivessel

1 onsisted of 143 patients who underwent early multivessel (2.1 +/- 0.7 arteries/patient) IVUS examinat

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

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

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

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

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

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 Multivessel angioplasty studies have reported decreased

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

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

14 Multivessel CABG is associated with lower long-term mort

15 Fifty-two patients undergoing multivessel CABG were studied by preoperative and early

16 (n = 67; 0%, 25%, 50%, and 62% prevalence of multivessel CAD across progressive cTnT quartiles, P<.00

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

18 Multivessel CAD and residual uncontrolled risk factors a

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

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

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

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

23 Eighteen patients with multivessel CAD underwent dynamic positron emission tomo

24 95 to June 2005, 1,240 patients with ACS and multivessel CAD underwent percutaneous coronary interven

25 pulation included patients with diabetes and multivessel CAD who underwent elective coronary revascul

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

36 predicts outcome after PCI in patients with multivessel CAD.

37 an added advantage over SPECT for evaluating multivessel CAD.

38 imal stress and in identifying patients with multivessel CAD.

39 revascularization for diabetic patients with multivessel CAD.

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

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

42 99 through December 2000, identified 204 602 multivessel coronary artery bypass (CABG) patients.

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

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

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

46 d application of totally endoscopic off-pump multivessel coronary artery bypass surgery.

47 .001 for all), but only modest increases in multivessel coronary artery disease (43.7% in 2010 and 4

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

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

50 ularization among patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) were analyzed

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

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

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

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

55 omography in 54 patients (19 with T2DM) with multivessel coronary artery disease and heart failure.

56 Fifteen patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and left ventricular

57 In patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and many high-risk c

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

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

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

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

62 Patients with multivessel coronary artery disease during original PCI

63 ity and mortality for the 3608 patients with multivessel coronary artery disease enrolled in the Bypa

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

65 demonstrated that symptomatic diabetics with multivessel coronary artery disease had a survival advan

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

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

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

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

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

71 Revascularization strategies for multivessel coronary artery disease include percutaneous

72 The optimal treatment for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease is uncertain given t

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

83 80 patients undergoing revascularization for multivessel coronary artery disease were identified.

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

85 10, 1900 patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease were randomized to P

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

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

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

89 Treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease with traditional sin

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

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

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

93 ents was 61 years, 36% had diabetes, 43% had multivessel coronary artery disease, and all had a norma

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

111 cutaneous revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

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

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

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

115 aches for revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

116 minimally invasive options for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

117 re both safe and beneficial in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

118 ssue artifacts and enhances the detection of multivessel coronary artery disease.

119 ascularization Investigation (BARI); all had multivessel coronary artery disease.

120 t the role of PCI for selected patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

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

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

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

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

125 onary interventions (PCIs) for patients with multivessel coronary disease (MVD) report similar long-t

126 Although diabetic patients who have multivessel coronary disease and require initial revascu

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

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

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

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

131 Patients with multivessel coronary disease treated with coronary arter

132 Patients with multivessel coronary disease were recruited into a rando

133 Patients with stable multivessel coronary disease who took a protocol-mandate

134 Patients with multivessel coronary disease who were previously enrolle

135 rategies, showed that diabetic patients with multivessel coronary disease who were undergoing an init

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

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

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

139 dard balloon angioplasty among patients with multivessel coronary disease.

140 eous coronary intervention (PCI) or surgical multivessel coronary revascularization (CABG) are equiva

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

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

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

144 onically instrumented closed-chest dogs with multivessel coronary stenosis were studied.

145 ts, aged patients had a higher prevalence of multivessel disease (16.5% vs. 9.6%, p = 0.001), unstabl

146 25.5 vs. 40.1%, p = 0.047), anterior MI, and multivessel disease (34.8 vs. 77.8%, p < 0.001) and a sh

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

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

149 p = 0.001), history of prior MI (p = 0.003), multivessel disease (p = 0.006), and advancing age (p <

150 ction <14 days = 7; elevated creatinine = 4; multivessel disease = 4; and age >65 years = 3.

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

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

153 The accuracy was high in single-vessel and multivessel disease and independent of CAD location.

154 Bypass surgery for patients with multivessel disease and ISR provided the best outcomes.

155 heart failure class III or higher, thrombus, multivessel disease and older age.

156 Patients with multivessel disease and severe left ventricular systolic

157 Among patients with multivessel disease and severe left ventricular systolic

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

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

160 eous coronary interventions in patients with multivessel disease and the recent introduction of drug-

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

162 lder, women, hypertensive and diabetic, with multivessel disease and with reduced left ventricular fu

163 rdiac-related health status in patients with multivessel disease at 6- and 12-month follow-up.

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

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

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

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

168 neous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel disease is unclear in that there is little i

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

176 rtery has been investigated in patients with multivessel disease to provide a minimally invasive ther

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

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

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

180 The degree of multivessel disease was similar between the two groups.

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

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

183 Diabetes mellitus and multivessel disease were independently associated with i

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

185 on Investigation (BARI), 1,829 patients with multivessel disease were randomized to an initial strate

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

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

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

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

190 registries to identify 37,212 patients with multivessel disease who underwent CABG and 22,102 patien

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

192 who underwent CABG and 22,102 patients with multivessel disease who underwent PCI from January 1, 19

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

194 A total of 68.9% of all stent patients with multivessel disease who were studied were IR, and 30.1%

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

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

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

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

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

200 (131 had single-vessel disease [SVD]; 30 had multivessel disease), and 310 (60.1%) had >/=50% stenosi

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

208 For patients with multivessel disease, CABG provided a survival advantage

209 In subgroup analysis of multivessel disease, CABG provided significant survival

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

211 isk of adverse events, a higher incidence of multivessel disease, complex lesions, and visible thromb

212 Among patients with multivessel disease, contemporary PCI resulted in safer

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

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

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

216 G for ISR, mainly because of the presence of multivessel disease, had significantly better outcomes t

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

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

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

220 the following contentions: For patients with multivessel disease, particularly involving the proximal

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

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

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

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

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

226 segment-elevation myocardial infarction have multivessel disease.

227 e analysis was restricted to only those with multivessel disease.

228 was cost-effective as compared with PTCA for multivessel disease.

229 onary atherosclerosis and more than half had multivessel disease.

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

231 morbidities, including cardiogenic shock and multivessel disease.

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

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

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

235 Patients with multivessel distribution of echocardiographic abnormalit

236 Patients with multivessel distribution of exercise echocardiographic a

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

245 Similarly, a multivessel fixed defect was associated with the highest

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

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

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

249 Multivessel intervention was associated with lower death

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

251 ients underwent shorter procedures with less multivessel intervention.

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

253 group of chronic stable angina patients with multivessel IVUS imaging.

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

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

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

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

258 In multivessel non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarcti

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

271 nly than among those who underwent immediate multivessel PCI.

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

273 inical and angiographic characteristics, and multivessel PCI.

274 rization of nonculprit lesions, or immediate multivessel PCI.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

287 Multivessel SCAD was found in 23%.

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

289 sence of single-vessel stenosis (SVS) versus multivessel stenosis (MVS).

290 Multivessel stenting was performed in 689 patients with

291 Despite a high technical success rate of multivessel stenting, diabetic patients, especially thos

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

293 ternative to open coronary bypass surgery or multivessel stenting.

294 ccess and acceptable clinical outcomes after multivessel stenting.

295 n, and target lesion revascularization after multivessel stenting.

296 clinical outcomes in diabetic patients after multivessel stenting.

297 it may be considered for patients undergoing multivessel stents if proven in larger randomized studie

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

299 ter randomized trial, 60 patients undergoing multivessel total arterial revascularization were random

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