NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Dolor RJ, Melloni C, Chatterjee R, et al. Treatment Strategies for Women With Coronary Artery Disease [Internet]. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2012 Aug. (Comparative Effectiveness Reviews, No. 66.)

  • This publication is provided for historical reference only and the information may be out of date.

This publication is provided for historical reference only and the information may be out of date.

Cover of Treatment Strategies for Women With Coronary Artery Disease

Treatment Strategies for Women With Coronary Artery Disease [Internet].

Show details

References

1.
Roger VL, Go AS, Lloyd-Jones DM, et al. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2012 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2012;125(1):e2–e220. [PMC free article: PMC4440543] [PubMed: 22179539]
2.
Mosca L, Banka CL, Benjamin EJ, et al. Evidence-based guidelines for cardiovascular disease prevention in women: 2007 update. Circulation. 2007;115(11):1481–501. [PubMed: 17309915]
3.
Vaccarino V, Horwitz RI, Meehan TP, et al. Sex differences in mortality after myocardial infarction: evidence for a sex-age interaction. Arch Intern Med. 1998;158(18):2054–62. [PubMed: 9778206]
4.
Vaccarino V, Parsons L, Every NR, et al. Sex-based differences in early mortality after myocardial infarction. National Registry of Myocardial Infarction 2 Participants. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(4):217–25. [PubMed: 10413733]
5.
Vaccarino V, Krumholz HM, Yarzebski J, et al. Sex differences in 2-year mortality after hospital discharge for myocardial infarction. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134(3):173–81. [PubMed: 11177329]
6.
Shaw LJ, Bugiardini R, Merz CN. Women and ischemic heart disease: evolving knowledge. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54(17):1561–75. [PMC free article: PMC2789479] [PubMed: 19833255]
7.
Hochman JS, Tamis JE, Thompson TD, et al. Sex, clinical presentation, and outcome in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries in Acute Coronary Syndromes IIb Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(4):226–32. [PubMed: 10413734]
8.
Berger JS, Elliott L, Gallup D, et al. Sex differences in mortality following acute coronary syndromes. JAMA. 2009;302(8):874–82. [PMC free article: PMC2778841] [PubMed: 19706861]
9.
Mieres JH, Shaw LJ, Arai A, et al. Role of noninvasive testing in the clinical evaluation of women with suspected coronary artery disease: consensus statement from the Cardiac Imaging Committee, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and the Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention Committee, Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, American Heart Association. Circulation. 2005;111(5):682–96. [PubMed: 15687114]
10.
Alexander KP, Chen AY, Newby LK, et al. Sex differences in major bleeding with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors: results from the CRUSADE (Can Rapid risk stratification of Unstable angina patients Suppress ADverse outcomes with Early implementation of the ACC/AHAguidelines) initiative. Circulation. 2006;114(13):1380–7. [PubMed: 16982940]
11.
Pepine CJ. Ischemic heart disease in women: facts and wishful thinking. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43(10):1727–30. [PubMed: 15145090]
12.
Vaccarino V, Abramson JL, Veledar E, et al. Sex differences in hospital mortality after coronary artery bypass surgery: evidence for a higher mortality in younger women. Circulation. 2002;105(10):1176–81. [PubMed: 11889010]
13.
Mikhail GW. Coronary heart disease in women. BMJ. 2005;331(7515):467–8. [PMC free article: PMC1199011] [PubMed: 16141136]
14.
Daly C, Clemens F, Lopez Sendon JL, et al. Gender differences in the management and clinical outcome of stable angina. Circulation. 2006;113(4):490–8. [PubMed: 16449728]
15.
Blomkalns AL, Chen AY, Hochman JS, et al. Gender disparities in the diagnosis and treatment of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: large-scale observations from the CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes With Early Implementation of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines) National Quality Improvement Initiative. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45(6):832–7. [PubMed: 15766815]
16.
Anand SS, Xie CC, Mehta S, et al. Differences in the management and prognosis of women and men who suffer from acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46(10):1845–51. [PubMed: 16286169]
17.
Vaccarino V, Rathore SS, Wenger NK, et al. Sex and racial differences in the management of acute myocardial infarction, 1994 through 2002. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(7):671–82. [PMC free article: PMC2805130] [PubMed: 16107620]
18.
Milner KA, Funk M, Richards S, et al. Gender differences in symptom presentation associated with coronary heart disease. Am J Cardiol. 1999;84(4):396–9. [PubMed: 10468075]
19.
Patel H, Rosengren A, Ekman I. Symptoms in acute coronary syndromes: does sex make a difference? Am Heart J. 2004;148(1):27–33. [PubMed: 15215788]
20.
Klein J, Karawan A, Abeles-Raviv N, et al. Is there a gender difference in risk profile, attendance, and beneficial effects of a multidisciplinary cardiac rehabilitation program? Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2002;39(Supplement 1):1088–1137.
21.
Kaski J. Cardiac syndrome X. In: Wenger NK, Collins P, editors. Women and heart disease. 2nd ed. London: Informa Healthcare; 2005. pp. 205–216.
22.
Clayton TC, Pocock SJ, Henderson RA, et al. Do men benefit more than women from an interventional strategy in patients with unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction? The impact of gender in the RITA 3 trial. Eur Heart J. 2004;25(18):1641–50. [PubMed: 15351164]
23.
Hochman JS, McCabe CH, Stone PH, et al. Outcome and profile of women and men presenting with acute coronary syndromes: a report from TIMI IIIB. TIMI Investigators Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;30(1):141–8. [PubMed: 9207635]
24.
Kreatsoulas C, Natarajan MK, Khatun R, et al. Identifying women with severe angiographic coronary disease. J Intern Med. 2010;268(1):66–74. [PubMed: 20210841]
25.
Wenger NK. Angina in women. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2010;12(4):307–14. [PubMed: 20425162]
26.
Lee PY, Alexander KP, Hammill BG, et al. Representation of elderly persons and women in published randomized trials of acute coronary syndromes. JAMA. 2001;286(6):708–13. [PubMed: 11495621]
27.
Melloni C, Berger JS, Wang TY, et al. Representation of women in randomized clinical trials of cardiovascular disease prevention. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2010;3(2):135–42. [PubMed: 20160159]
28.
Anderson JL, Adams CD, Antman EM, et al. ACC/AHA 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Patients with Unstable Angina/Non ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction): developed in collaboration with the American College of Emergency Physicians, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons: endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. Circulation. 2007;116(7):e148–304. [PubMed: 17679616]
29.
Kushner FG, Hand M, Smith SC Jr, et al. Focused Updates: ACC/AHA Guidelines for the Management of Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (updating the 2004 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update) and ACC/AHA/SCAI Guidelines on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (updating the 2005 Guideline and 2007 Focused Update): a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2009;120(22):2271–306. 2009. [PubMed: 19923169]
30.
Gibbons RJ, Abrams J, Chatterjee K, et al. ACC/AHA 2002 Guideline Update for the Management of Patients With Chronic Stable Angina--summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients With Chronic Stable Angina) Circulation. 2003;107(1):149–58. [PubMed: 12515758]
31.
Sibley C, Rivera J, Blumenthal RS. ‘ABCDE’ makes an effective prevention tool. Cardiology Today: approach translates guidelines into a comprehensive management plan for the primary and seconday prevention of CVD. Jun 1, 2007. [commentary] www​.cardiologytoday.com/view​.aspx?rid=39071.
32.
Lansky AJ, Hochman JS, Ward PA, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention and adjunctive pharmacotherapy in women: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2005;111(7):940–53. [PubMed: 15687113]
33.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews, Version 1.0. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Draft Posted October 2007. www​.effectivehealthcare​.ahrq.gov/index.cfm​/search-for-guides-reviews-and-reports​/?pageaction=displayproduct&productid=318.
34.
Bravata DM, McDonald KM, Gienger AL, et al. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 9. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Oct, 2007. Comparative Effectiveness of Percutaneous Coronary Interventions and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Coronary Artery Disease. (Prepared by Stanford-UCSF Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-02-0017) www​.effectivehealthcare​.ahrq.gov/ehc/products​/15/55/CER_PCI_CABGMainReport.pdf. [PubMed: 20704052]
35.
Grady D, Chaput L, Kristof M. Results of systematic review of research on diagnosis and treatment of coronary heart disease in women. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ) 2003;(80):1–4. [PMC free article: PMC4781182] [PubMed: 12827897]
36.
Di Mario C, Dudek D, Piscione F, et al. Immediate angioplasty versus standard therapy with rescue angioplasty after thrombolysis in the Combined Abciximab REteplase Stent Study in Acute Myocardial Infarction (CARESS-in-AMI): an open, prospective, randomised, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2008;371(9612):559–68. [PubMed: 18280326]
37.
Andersen HR, Nielsen TT, Rasmussen K, et al. A comparison of coronary angioplasty with fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(8):733–42. [PubMed: 12930925]
38.
Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, White HD, et al. One-year survival following early revascularization for cardiogenic shock. JAMA. 2001;285(2):190–2. [PubMed: 11176812]
39.
Tamis-Holland JE, Palazzo A, Stebbins AL, et al. Benefits of direct angioplasty for women and men with acute myocardial infarction: results of the Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Arteries in Acute Coronary Syndromes Angioplasty (GUSTO II-B) Angioplasty Substudy. Am Heart J. 2004;147(1):133–9. [PubMed: 14691431]
40.
Dobrzycki S, Kralisz P, Nowak K, et al. Transfer with GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban for primary percutaneous coronary intervention vs. on-site thrombolysis in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI): a randomized open-label study for patients admitted to community hospitals. Eur Heart J. 2007;28(20):2438–48. [PubMed: 17884846]
41.
Minai K, Horie H, Takahashi M, et al. Long-term outcome of primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty for low-risk acute myocardial infarction in patients older than 80 years: a single-center, open, randomized trial. Am Heart J. 2002;143(3):497–505. [PubMed: 11868057]
42.
Stone GW, Grines CL, Browne KF, et al. Comparison of in-hospital outcome in men versus women treated by either thrombolytic therapy or primary coronary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1995;75(15):987–92. [PubMed: 7747700]
43.
Di Mario C, Bolognese L, Maillard L, et al. Combined Abciximab REteplase Stent Study in acute myocardial infarction (CARESS in AMI) Am Heart J. 2004;148(3):378–85. [PubMed: 15389222]
44.
Mortensen OS, Bjorner JB, Newman B, et al. Gender differences in health-related quality of life following ST-elevation myocardial infarction: women and men do not benefit from primary percutaneous coronary intervention to the same degree. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2007;14(1):37–43. [PubMed: 17301625]
45.
Nielsen PH, Maeng M, Busk M, et al. Primary angioplasty versus fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction: long-term follow-up in the Danish acute myocardial infarction 2 trial. Circulation. 2010;121(13):1484–91. [PubMed: 20308618]
46.
Busk M, Maeng M, Kristensen SD, et al. Timing, causes, and predictors of death after three years’ follow-up in the Danish Multicenter Randomized Study of Fibrinolysis versus Primary Angioplasty in Acute Myocardial Infarction (DANAMI-2) trial. Am J Cardiol. 2009;104(2):210–5. [PubMed: 19576349]
47.
Busk M, Maeng M, Rasmussen K, et al. The Danish multicentre randomized study of fibrinolytic therapy vs. primary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction (the DANAMI-2 trial): outcome after 3 years follow-up. Eur Heart J. 2008;29(10):1259–66. [PubMed: 17956874]
48.
Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG, et al. Early revascularization and long-term survival in cardiogenic shock complicating acute myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2006;295(21):2511–5. [PMC free article: PMC1782030] [PubMed: 16757723]
49.
Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Godfrey E, et al. SHould we emergently revascularize Occluded Coronaries for cardiogenic shocK: an international randomized trial of emergency PTCA/CABG-trial design. The SHOCK Trial Study Group. Am Heart J. 1999;137(2):313–21. [PubMed: 9924166]
50.
Hochman JS, Sleeper LA, Webb JG, et al. Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. SHOCK Investigators Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(9):625–34. [PubMed: 10460813]
51.
Glaser R, Herrmann HC, Murphy SA, et al. Benefit of an early invasive management strategy in women with acute coronary syndromes. JAMA. 2002;288(24):3124–9. [PubMed: 12495392]
52.
Lagerqvist B, Safstrom K, Stahle E, et al. Is early invasive treatment of unstable coronary artery disease equally effective for both women and men? FRISC II Study Group Investigators. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38(1):41–8. [PubMed: 11451294]
53.
Ottervanger JP, Armstrong P, Barnathan ES, et al. Association of revascularisation with low mortality in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome, a report from GUSTO IV-ACS. Eur Heart J. 2004;25(17):1494–501. [PubMed: 15342168]
54.
Anonymous. Coronary angioplasty versus medical therapy for angina: the second Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA-2) trial. RITA-2 trial participants. Lancet. 1997;350(9076):461–8. [PubMed: 9274581]
55.
Cannon CP, Weintraub WS, Demopoulos LA, et al. Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(25):1879–87. [PubMed: 11419424]
56.
de Winter RJ, Windhausen F, Cornel JH, et al. Early invasive versus selectively invasive management for acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(11):1095–104. [PubMed: 16162880]
57.
Anonymous. Effects of tissue plasminogen activator and a comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction. Results of the TIMI IIIB Trial Thrombolysis in Myocardial Ischemia. Circulation. 1994;89(4):1545–56. [PubMed: 8149520]
58.
Lagerqvist B, Husted S, Kontny F, et al. 5-year outcomes in the FRISC-II randomised trial of an invasive versus a non-invasive strategy in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: a follow-up study. Lancet. 2006;368(9540):998–1004. [PubMed: 16980115]
59.
Wallentin L, Lagerqvist B, Husted S, et al. Outcome at 1 year after an invasive compared with a non-invasive strategy in unstable coronary-artery disease: The FRISC II invasive randomised trial. Lancet. 2000;355(9223):9–16. [PubMed: 10892758]
60.
Anonymous. Invasive compared with non-invasive treatment in unstable coronary-artery disease: FRISC II prospective randomised multicentre study. FRagmin and Fast Revascularisation during InStability in Coronary artery disease Investigators. Lancet. 1999;354(9180):708–15. [PubMed: 10475181]
61.
Damman P, Hirsch A, Windhausen F, et al. 5-year clinical outcomes in the ICTUS (Invasive versus Conservative Treatment in Unstable coronary Syndromes) trial a randomized comparison of an early invasive versus selective invasive management in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(9):858–64. [PubMed: 20045278]
62.
Fox KA, Poole-Wilson PA, Henderson RA, et al. Interventional versus conservative treatment for patients with unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation RITA 3 randomised trial. Randomized Intervention Trial of unstable Angina. Lancet. 2002;360(9335):743–51. [PubMed: 12241831]
63.
Cannon CP, Weintraub WS, Demopoulos LA, et al. Invasive versus conservative strategies in unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction following treatment with tirofiban: rationale and study design of the international TACTICS-TIMI 18 Trial. Treat Angina with Aggrastat and determine Cost of Therapy with an Invasive or Conservative Strategy. Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction. Am J Cardiol. 1998;82(6):731–6. [PubMed: 9761082]
64.
Anderson HV, Cannon CP, Stone PH, et al. One-year results of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) IIIB clinical trial. A randomized comparison of tissue-type plasminogen activator versus placebo and early invasive versus early conservative strategies in unstable angina and non-Q wave myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;26(7):1643–50. [PubMed: 7594098]
65.
Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(15):1503–16. [PubMed: 17387127]
66.
Hochman JS, Lamas GA, Buller CE, et al. Coronary intervention for persistent occlusion after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(23):2395–407. [PMC free article: PMC1995554] [PubMed: 17105759]
67.
Velazquez EJ, Lee KL, Deja MA, et al. Coronary-Artery Bypass Surgery in Patients with Left Ventricular Dysfunction. N Engl J Med. 2011 [PMC free article: PMC3415273] [PubMed: 21463150]
68.
Hueb W, Lopes N, Gersh BJ, et al. Ten-year follow-up survival of the Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS II): a randomized controlled clinical trial of 3 therapeutic strategies for multivessel coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2010;122(10):949–57. [PubMed: 20733102]
69.
Allen KB, Dowling RD, Angell WW, et al. Transmyocardial revascularization: 5-year follow-up of a prospective, randomized multicenter trial. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;77(4):1228–34. [PubMed: 15063241]
70.
Allen KB, Dowling RD, Fudge TL, et al. Comparison of transmyocardial revascularization with medical therapy in patients with refractory angina. N Engl J Med. 1999;341(14):1029–36. [PubMed: 10502592]
71.
Mancini GB, Bates ER, Maron DJ, et al. Quantitative results of baseline angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention in the COURAGE trial. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2009;2(4):320–7. [PubMed: 20031857]
72.
Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, et al. Design and rationale of the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive DruG Evaluation (COURAGE) trial Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program no. 424. Am Heart J. 2006;151(6):1173–9. [PubMed: 16781214]
73.
Hueb W, Soares PR, Gersh BJ, et al. The medicine, angioplasty, or surgery study (MASS-II): a randomized, controlled clinical trial of three therapeutic strategies for multivessel coronary artery disease: one-year results. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43(10):1743–51. [PubMed: 15145093]
74.
Hueb W, Lopes NH, Gersh BJ, et al. Five-year follow-up of the Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS II): a randomized controlled clinical trial of 3 therapeutic strategies for multivessel coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2007;115(9):1082–9. [PubMed: 17339566]
75.
Hochman JS, Lamas GA, Knatterud GL, et al. Design and methodology of the Occluded Artery Trial (OAT) Am Heart J. 2005;150(4):627–42. [PubMed: 16209957]
76.
Hochman JS, Reynolds HR, Dzavik V, et al. Long-term effects of percutaneous coronary intervention of the totally occluded infarct-related artery in the subacute phase after myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2011;124(21):2320–2328. [PMC free article: PMC3235739] [PubMed: 22025606]
77.
Velazquez EJ, Lee KL, O’Connor CM, et al. The rationale and design of the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007;134(6):1540–7. [PMC free article: PMC3638867] [PubMed: 18023680]
78.
Vaina S, Voudris V, Morice MC, et al. Effect of gender differences on early and mid-term clinical outcome after percutaneous or surgical coronary revascularisation in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: insights from ARTS I and ARTS II. EuroIntervention. 2009;4(4):492–501. [PubMed: 19284072]
79.
Jacobs AK, Kelsey SF, Brooks MM, et al. Better outcome for women compared with men undergoing coronary revascularization: a report from the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation (BARI) Circulation. 1998;98(13):1279–85. [PubMed: 9751675]
80.
Anonymous. First-year results of CABRI (Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularisation Investigation). CABRI Trial Participants. Lancet. 1995;346(8984):1179–84. [PubMed: 7475656]
81.
King SB 3rd, Kosinski AS, Guyton RA, et al. Eight-year mortality in the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST) J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;35(5):1116–21. [PubMed: 10758949]
82.
Zhang Z, Weintraub WS, Mahoney EM, et al. Relative benefit of coronary artery bypass grafting versus stent-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention for angina pectoris and multivessel coronary disease in women versus men (one-year results from the Stent or Surgery trial) Am J Cardiol. 2004;93(4):404–9. [PubMed: 14969611]
83.
Morice MC, Serruys PW, Kappetein AP, et al. Outcomes in patients with de novo left main disease treated with either percutaneous coronary intervention using paclitaxel-eluting stents or coronary artery bypass graft treatment in the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial. Circulation. 2010;121(24):2645–53. [PubMed: 20530001]
84.
Kapur A, Hall RJ, Malik IS, et al. Randomized comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention with coronary artery bypass grafting in diabetic patients. 1-year results of the CARDia (Coronary Artery Revascularization in Diabetes) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(5):432–40. [PubMed: 20117456]
85.
Park SJ, Kim YH, Park DW, et al. Randomized trial of stents versus bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2011;18:1718–27. [PubMed: 21463149]
86.
Kaehler J, Koester R, Billmann W, et al. 13-year follow-up of the German angioplasty bypass surgery investigation. Eur Heart J. 2005;26(20):2148–53. [PubMed: 15975991]
87.
van den Brand MJ, Rensing BJ, Morel MA, et al. The effect of completeness of revascularization on event-free survival at one year in the ARTS trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39(4):559–64. [PubMed: 11849851]
88.
Serruys PW, Unger F, van Hout BA, et al. The ARTS study (Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study) Semin Interv Cardiol. 1999;4(4):209–19. [PubMed: 10738354]
89.
Voudris V, Ong AT, Serruys PW, et al. Sex differences and their impact on clinical outcome after percutaneous or surgical revascularisation: a report from the Arterial Revascularisation Therapies Study (ARTS) EuroIntervention. 2006;2(2):175–80. [PubMed: 19755257]
90.
Anonymous. The ARTS (Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study): Background, goals and methods. Int J Cardiovasc Intervent. 1999;2(1):41–50. [PubMed: 12623386]
91.
Gibbons RJ, Miller DD, Liu P, et al. Similarity of ventricular function in patients alive 5 years after randomization to surgery or angioplasty in the BARI trial. Circulation. 2001;103(8):1076–82. [PubMed: 11222469]
92.
Anonymous. The final 10-year follow-up results from the BARI randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(15):1600–6. [PubMed: 17433949]
93.
Lombardero MS. Seven-year outcome in the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation (BARI), by treatment and presence of diabetes. Cardiovasc Rev Rep. 2002;23(1):14–18.
94.
Anonymous. Seven-year outcome in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) by treatment and diabetic status. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;35(5):1122–9. [PubMed: 10758950]
95.
Hlatky MA, Charles ED, Nobrega F, et al. Initial functional and economic status of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease randomized in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Am J Cardiol. 1995;75(9):34C–41C. [PubMed: 7892821]
96.
Rogers WJ, Alderman EL, Chaitman BR, et al. Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI): baseline clinical and angiographic data. Am J Cardiol. 1995;75(9):9C–17C. [PubMed: 7892823]
97.
Sutton-Tyrrell K, Rihal C, Sellers MA, et al. Long-term prognostic value of clinically evident noncoronary vascular disease in patients undergoing coronary revascularization in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Am J Cardiol. 1998;81(4):375–81. [PubMed: 9485122]
98.
Mullany CJ, Mock MB, Brooks MM, et al. Effect of age in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) randomized trial. Ann Thorac Surg. 1999;67(2):396–403. [PubMed: 10197660]
99.
Anonymous. Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with angioplasty in patients with multivessel disease. The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1996;335(4):217–25. [PubMed: 8657237]
100.
Kapur A, Malik IS, Bagger JP, et al. The Coronary Artery Revascularisation in Diabetes (CARDia) trial: background, aims, and design. Am Heart J. 2005;149(1):13–9. [PubMed: 15660030]
101.
King SB 3rd, Lembo NJ, Weintraub WS, et al. Emory Angioplasty Versus Surgery Trial (EAST): design, recruitment, and baseline description of patients. Am J Cardiol. 1995;75(9):42C–59C. [PubMed: 7892822]
102.
King SB 3rd, Lembo NJ, Weintraub WS, et al. A randomized trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST) N Engl J Med. 1994;331(16):1044–50. [PubMed: 8090163]
103.
Zhao XQ, Brown BG, Stewart DK, et al. Effectiveness of revascularization in the Emory angioplasty versus surgery trial. A randomized comparison of coronary angioplasty with bypass surgery. Circulation. 1996;93(11):1954–62. [PubMed: 8640968]
104.
Hamm CW, Reimers J, Ischinger T, et al. A randomized study of coronary angioplasty compared with bypass surgery in patients with symptomatic multivessel coronary disease. German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation (GABI) N Engl J Med. 1994;331(16):1037–43. [PubMed: 8090162]
105.
Zhang Z, Mahoney EM, Stables RH, et al. Disease-specific health status after stent-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass surgery: one-year results from the Stent or Surgery trial. Circulation. 2003;108(14):1694–700. [PubMed: 12975252]
106.
Stables RH. Design of the ‘Stent or Surgery’ trial (SoS): a randomized controlled trial to compare coronary artery bypass grafting with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and primary stent implantation in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease. Semin Interv Cardiol. 1999;4(4):201–7. [PubMed: 10738353]
107.
Keeley EC, Boura JA, Grines CL. Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials. Lancet. 2003;361(9351):13–20. [PubMed: 12517460]
108.
Mehta SR, Cannon CP, Fox KA, et al. Routine vs selective invasive strategies in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials. JAMA. 2005;293(23):2908–17. [PubMed: 15956636]
109.
Hlatky MA, Boothroyd DB, Bravata DM, et al. Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 9 Addendum. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Feb, 2010. Addendum to Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Compared With Percutaneous Coronary Interventions for Multivessel Disease. (Prepared by Stanford-UCSF Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-02-0017) www​.effectivehealthcare​.ahrq.gov/ehc/products​/15/421/CER9%20Addendum%20Final.pdf.
110.
Hlatky MA, Boothroyd DB, Bravata DM, et al. Coronary artery bypass surgery compared with percutaneous coronary interventions for multivessel disease: a collaborative analysis of individual patient data from ten randomised trials. Lancet. 2009;373(9670):1190–7. [PubMed: 19303634]
111.
Women’s Health Research: Progress, Pitfalls, and Promise. Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, Consensus Report. 2010. www​.iom.edu/Reports/2010​/Womens-Health-Research-Progress-Pitfalls-and-Promise​.aspx.

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (1.7M)

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...