Treatment options for multivessel coronary artery disease

References

• Morrison DA, Sethi G, Sacks J et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: a multicenter, randomized trial. Investigators of the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, the Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation (AWESOME). J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 38(1), 143–149 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez A, Bernardi V, Navia J et al. Argentine Randomized Study: coronary angioplasty with stenting versus coronary bypass surgery in patients with multiplevessel disease (ERACI II): 30-day and one-year follow-up results. ERACI II Investigators. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 37(1), 51–58 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial. Lancet 341(8845), 573–580 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CABRI trial participants. First-year results of CABRI (Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularisation Investigation). Lancet 346(8984), 1179–1184 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) investigators. Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with angioplasty in patients with multivessel disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 335(4), 217–225 (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Rodriguez AE, Baldi J, Fernandez Pereira C et al. Five-year follow-up of the Argentine randomized trial of coronary angioplasty with stenting versus coronary bypass surgery in patients with multiple vessel disease (ERACI II). J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 46(4), 582–588 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SoS Investigators. Coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (the Stent or Surgery trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 360(9338), 965–970 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Unger F, van Hout BA et al. The ARTS study (Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study). Semin. Interv. Cardiol. 4(4), 209–219 (1999).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Serruys PW, Unger F, Sousa JE et al. Comparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 344(15), 1117–1124 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Ong AT, van Herwerden LA et al. Five-year outcomes after coronary stenting versus bypass surgery for the treatment of multivessel disease: the final analysis of the Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study (ARTS) randomized trial. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 46(4), 575–581 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercado N, Wijns W. One-year outcomes of coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with multiple stenting for multisystem disease: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized clinical trials. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 130(2), 512–529 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arampatzis CA, Lemos PA, Hoye A et al. Elective sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for left main coronary artery disease: six-month angiographic follow-up and 1-year clinical outcome. Catheter Cardiovasc. Interv. 62(3), 292–296; discussion 297 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arampatzis CA, Lemos PA, Tanabe K et al. Effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stent for treatment of left main coronary artery disease. Am. J. Cardiol. 92(3), 327–329 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chieffo A, Stankovic G, Bonizzoni E et al. Early and mid-term results of drug-eluting stent implantation in unprotected left main. Circulation 111(6), 791–795 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemos PA, Serruys PW, van Domburg RT et al. Unrestricted utilization of sirolimus-eluting stents compared with conventional bare stent implantation in the ‘real world’: the Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) registry. Circulation 109(2), 190–195 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ong AT, Serruys PW, Aoki J, Hoye A et al. The unrestricted use of paclitaxel- versus sirolimus-eluting stents for coronary artery disease in an unselected population: one-year results of the Taxus-Stent Evaluated at Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (T-SEARCH) registry. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 45(7), 1135–1141 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farb A, Burke AP, Kolodgie FD, Virmani R. Pathological mechanisms of fatal late coronary stent thrombosis in humans. Circulation 108(14), 1701–1706 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys P, Ong AT, Morice MC et al. Arterial Revascularisation Therapies Study Part II – sirolimus-eluting stents for the treatment of patients with multivessel de novo coronary artery lesions. EuroIntervention 2, 147–156 (2005)
   Google Scholar
• Ong AT, Serruys PW, Mohr FW et al. The SYNergy between percutaneous coronary Intervention with TAXUS™ and cardiac surgery (SYNTAX) study: design, rationale and run-in phase. Am. Heart J. (2005) (In Press).
   Google Scholar
• Sianos G, Morel MA, Kappetein AP et al. The SYNTAX Score: an angiographic tool grading the complexity of coronary artery disease. EuroIntervention 2, 219–227 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Kapur A, Malik IS, Bagger JP et al. The Coronary Artery Revascularisation in Diabetes (CARDia) trial: background, aims, and design. Am. Heart J. 149(1), 13–19 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar