Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://olympias.lib.uoi.gr/jspui/handle/123456789/22344
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorKatritsis, D. G.en
dc.contributor.authorSiontis, G. C.en
dc.contributor.authorIoannidis, J. P.en
dc.date.accessioned2015-11-24T19:23:38Z-
dc.date.available2015-11-24T19:23:38Z-
dc.identifier.issn1941-7632-
dc.identifier.urihttps://olympias.lib.uoi.gr/jspui/handle/123456789/22344-
dc.rightsDefault Licence-
dc.subjectAgeden
dc.subjectAngioplasty, Balloon, Coronary/*methodsen
dc.subjectBayes Theoremen
dc.subjectCoronary Disease/*therapyen
dc.subjectFemaleen
dc.subjectHumansen
dc.subjectMaleen
dc.subjectMiddle Ageden
dc.subjectMyocardial Infarction/epidemiologyen
dc.subjectRisk Factorsen
dc.subjectStents/*adverse effectsen
dc.subjectThrombosis/epidemiologyen
dc.subjectTreatment Outcomeen
dc.titleDouble versus single stenting for coronary bifurcation lesions: a meta-analysisen
heal.typejournalArticle-
heal.type.enJournal articleen
heal.type.elΆρθρο Περιοδικούel
heal.identifier.primary10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.109.868091-
heal.identifier.secondaryhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20031750-
heal.identifier.secondaryhttp://circinterventions.ahajournals.org/content/2/5/409.full.pdf-
heal.languageen-
heal.accesscampus-
heal.recordProviderΠανεπιστήμιο Ιωαννίνων. Σχολή Επιστημών Υγείας. Τμήμα Ιατρικήςel
heal.publicationDate2009-
heal.abstractBACKGROUND: Several trials have addressed whether bifurcation lesions require stenting of both the main vessel and side branch, but uncertainty remains on the benefits of such double versus single stenting of the main vessel only. METHODS AND RESULTS: We have conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials including patients with coronary bifurcation lesions who were randomly selected to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention by either double or single stenting. Six studies (n=1642 patients) were eligible. There was increased risk of myocardial infarction with double stenting (risk ratio, 1.78; P=0.001 by fixed effects; risk ratio, 1.49 with Bayesian meta-analysis). The summary point estimate suggested also an increased risk of stent thrombosis with double stenting, but the difference was not nominally significant given the sparse data (risk ratio, 1.85; P=0.19). No obvious difference was seen for death (risk ratio, 0.81; P=0.66) and target lesion revascularization (risk ratio, 1.09; P=0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Stenting of both the main vessel and side branch in bifurcation lesions may increase myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis risk compared with stenting of the main vessel only.en
heal.journalNameCirc Cardiovasc Interven
heal.journalTypepeer-reviewed-
heal.fullTextAvailabilityTRUE-
Appears in Collections:Άρθρα σε επιστημονικά περιοδικά ( Ανοικτά) - ΙΑΤ

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Katritsis-2009-Double versus single.pdf730.72 kBAdobe PDFView/Open    Request a copy


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons