http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Gebow, Dan (검색결과 1 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
Chang, Hyuk-Jae,Lin, Fay Y.,Gebow, Dan,An, Hae Young,Andreini, Daniele,Bathina, Ravi,Baggiano, Andrea,Beltrama, Virginia,Cerci, Rodrigo,Choi, Eui-Young,Choi, Jung-Hyun,Choi, So-Yeon,Chung, Namsik,Cole American College of Cardiology 2019 JACC. Cardiovascular imaging Vol.12 No.7
<P><B>Graphical abstract</B></P><P>[Figure]</P><P><B>Abstract</B></P><P><B>Objectives</B></P><P>This study compared the safety and diagnostic yield of a selective referral strategy using coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) compared with a direct referral strategy using invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as the index procedure.</P><P><B>Background</B></P><P>Among patients presenting with signs and symptoms suggestive of coronary artery disease (CAD), a sizeable proportion who are referred to ICA do not have a significant, obstructive stenosis.</P><P><B>Methods</B></P><P>In a multinational, randomized clinical trial of patients referred to ICA for nonemergent indications, a selective referral strategy was compared with a direct referral strategy. The primary endpoint was noninferiority with a multiplicative margin of 1.33 of composite major adverse cardiovascular events (blindly adjudicated death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, stroke, urgent and/or emergent coronary revascularization or cardiac hospitalization) at a median follow-up of 1-year.</P><P><B>Results</B></P><P>At 22 sites, 823 subjects were randomized to a selective referral and 808 to a direct referral strategy. At 1 year, selective referral met the noninferiority margin of 1.33 (p = 0.026) with a similar event rate between the randomized arms of the trial (4.6% vs. 4.6%; hazard ratio: 0.99; 95% confidence interval: 0.66 to 1.47). Following CCTA, only 23% of the selective referral arm went on to ICA, which was a rate lower than that of the direct referral strategy. Coronary revascularization occurred less often in the selective referral group compared with the direct referral to ICA (13% vs. 18%; p < 0.001). Rates of normal ICA were 24.6% in the selective referral arm compared with 61.1% in the direct referral arm of the trial (p < 0.001).</P><P><B>Conclusions</B></P><P>In stable patients with suspected CAD who are eligible for ICA, the comparable 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events rates following a selective referral and direct referral strategy suggests that both diagnostic approaches are similarly effective. In the selective referral strategy, the reduced use of ICA was associated with a greater diagnostic yield, which supported the usefulness of CCTA as an efficient and accurate method to guide decisions of ICA performance. (Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography for Selective Cardiac Catheterization [CONSERVE]; NCT01810198)</P>
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
