Interventional Treatment of Coronary Heart Disease and Peripheral Vascular Disease
2000; Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; Volume: 102; Issue: suppl_4 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1161/circ.102.suppl_4.iv-81
ISSN1524-4539
AutoresSpencer B. King, Bernhard Meier,
Tópico(s)Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
ResumoHomeCirculationVol. 102, No. suppl_4Interventional Treatment of Coronary Heart Disease and Peripheral Vascular Disease Free AccessOtherDownload EPUBAboutView EPUBSections ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload citationsTrack citationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyReddit Jump toFree AccessOtherDownload EPUBInterventional Treatment of Coronary Heart Disease and Peripheral Vascular Disease Spencer B. KingIII and Bernhard Meier Spencer B. KingIIISpencer B. KingIII and Bernhard MeierBernhard Meier Originally published14 Nov 2000https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.102.suppl_4.IV-81Circulation. 2000;102:Iv-81–Iv-86Other version(s) of this articleYou are viewing the most recent version of this article. Previous versions: November 14, 2000: Previous Version of Record In 1950, the ground for catheter-based interventions in peripheral or coronary arteries was laid (Table), but no activity had started.1Diagnostic Catheter ProceduresIn 1958, Mason Sones and his colleagues developed selective coronary angiography and published it as an abstract in Circulation.2 As a cardiologist at the Cleveland Clinic, he performed angiography of the aortic root in a patient with valvular heart disease. Looking directly into the x-ray beam, as was customary in the era before image intensifiers coupled to television systems (Figure 1), Sones recognized that the catheter had inadvertently slipped into the right coronary artery. The patient had transient asystole but no ventricular fibrillation. The high-quality picture of the right coronary artery obtained ushered in the era of selective coronary angiography. Sones subsequently refined this technique for routine use through a cut-down of the brachial artery. In parallel, Kurt Amplatz3 and Melvin Judkins4 further developed the technique using a femoral approach made possible by the Seldinger technique, introduced in 1953.5Precoronary Therapeutic Catheter InterventionsThe turn from purely diagnostic procedures to therapeutic interventions was launched in 1964 by Charles Dotter.6 In collaboration with Judkins at the University of Oregon in Portland, the vascular radiologist Dotter used coaxial catheters of increasing diameters to "bougie" narrowed leg arteries in patients with peripheral artery disease, analogous to the Benique technique for the urethra of 1846. The method failed to reach general acceptance, for several reasons. First, the dominance of vascular surgeons in the treatment of peripheral vascular disease in the United States invited a strong opposition to any nonsurgical therapeutic technique. Second, the method was quite crude and fraught with a considerable percentage of failures and complications. Third, the puncture site needed to be as large as the maximally attained diameter of the dilated stenosis, which limited the size of arteries amenable to this therapy. Notwithstanding, the method was imported in 1967 to East Germany by Porstmann and to West Germany by Zeitler. Both performed hundreds of procedures, and Zeitler introduced Gruentzig to the technique.Precoronary Balloon AngioplastyIn 1974, Andreas R. Gruentzig introduced the concept of balloon dilatation of arterial stenoses into clinical medicine. Dismayed with the limited potential of the Dotter method, he sought a solution to dilate arteries through a tiny entry hole. The balloon had been the solution on hand for Reybard to dilate the urethra in 1855. It was also the solution on hand for Gruentzig. The material used for the balloon turned out to be the key for success. Porstmann had just failed with a latex balloon. To contain the expansion of the balloon, he had caged it in a plastic catheter sliced longitudinally.7 Gruentzig had the splendid idea to walk across the street from his place of work, the University Hospital of Zurich, to the Technical University. There, a plastics expert suggested using polyvinyl chloride (PVC). The PVC balloon catheter Gruentzig manufactured with help from his wife and friends had a sausage shape and remained fairly form-constant once it reached its predesigned outer diameter. The Gruentzig balloon catheter was born,8 and 26 years later, in the year 2000, it was improved but unchanged in its basic characteristics.Coronary Balloon AngioplastyIn 1977, the breakthrough for catheter-based arterial therapeutic interventions came with the first coronary angioplasty procedure, performed by Gruentzig at the University Hospital of Zurich on September 16. A 38-year-old businessman had been hospitalized for a first bout of unstable angina. The symptoms subsided, and he underwent an exercise test, which showed anterior ST-segment elevation and ventricular ectopy accompanied by angina at peak exercise. A coronary angiogram performed on September 14, 1977, revealed a discrete but tight proximal stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery just before the takeoff of the first diagonal branch. One of the authors (B.M.), who was taking care of the patient at that time (as ever since), introduced him to Gruentzig, who offered him the option to have a balloon angioplasty attempted instead of the otherwise unavoidable bypass operation. The patient granted consent without hesitation with, as he stated later, immediate faith both in the method and even more so in the person of Andreas Gruentzig. He was not to regret it. The procedure was a full success.9 It engraved itself into the memories of the few persons present (including B.M.) and is still reminisced about at countless meetings dedicated to the method. The patient has remained absolutely symptom-free up to the year 2000. He underwent a coronary control angiography on the exact 10th anniversary of the intervention, performed by one of the authors of this article (S.B.K.). At almost 23 years of follow-up, he had an episode of atypical chest pain at rest. This prompted an additional coronary angiogram by the other author (B.M.), which showed that the dilated site was pristine (Figure 2).1011The first American publication about this method was an abstract published in Circulation and presented as a poster at the American Heart Association meeting in Miami, Fla, in November 1976 (Figure 3).12 The first few cases were published in the Lancet,13 and the first series in the New England Journal of Medicine.14 Thousands of subsequent articles, reviews, editorials, book chapters, books, videos, CDs, and internet publications have appeared subsequently on the topic, among them the first guidelines issued by a joint task force of the American Heart Association and the American College of Cardiology15 and a comprehensive review by one of the authors (S.B.K),11 both published in Circulation.Coronary StentingOn March 28, 1986 (just 5 months after October 27, 1985, when Gruentzig tragically perished in a plane crash piloting his twin-engine plane back from a weekend retreat, accompanied by his second wife and his dogs), Jacques Puel implanted the first coronary stent in a patient in Toulouse, France.16 The first clinical series on coronary and peripheral stenting were published jointly from Toulouse, France, and Lausanne, Switzerland.17 In Atlanta, Ga, the group of one of the authors (S.B.K.) was at that time on the brink of introducing coronary stenting to the United States, using a device pioneered by Cesare Gianturco, one of the most gifted inventors in the field. At the same time, a group in La Jolla, Calif, was working with a stent made by another great pioneer of catheter interventions, Julio Palmaz. Both of their seminal reports appeared in Circulation.1819 It is noteworthy that stenting of peripheral arteries had already been experimented with in the 1960s by Dotter, who already envisioned the use of stents in the coronary vasculature in his article at that time.20Although not recognized by everyone right away, the stent was the only prodigy among the many so-called new devices popping up to assist or replace the balloon in the late 1980s.21 Although some found niche applications, none of the other devices (atherectomy of the directional, rotational, or extractional kind or laser) designed for removing plaque tissue have stood the test of randomized trials. The stent, on the other hand, which simply shoves the tissue out of the way and scaffolds the occasionally occurring obstructive dissection, proved to be superior to balloon angioplasty in a large number of randomized trials, albeit only for reduction of restenosis and the need for reintervention. As a conceptually preventive tool against acute or subacute coronary closure, it proved salutary when used as a bail-out device but ineffective, if not deleterious, when used indiscriminately. This is mainly because of late occlusions, which are germane with stents but exceedingly rare with balloon angioplasty. The risk of such occlusions with stents initially prompted operators to use prolonged and intensified anticoagulation protocols. These and the lengthy approval process for implantable devices by the regulatory agency in the United States caused a somewhat sluggish acceptance of the stent in this country. Improved antiplatelet regimens that avoided oral anticoagulation22 and the easy availability of a variety of second- and third-generation stents finally induced a lively increase in coronary stenting among angioplasty procedures in the late 1990s. Interventional cardiology virtually turned into "interstentional" cardiology. Currently, the stenting rate in most institutions ranges from 70% to 90% of cases and 60% to 70% of lesions. The use of a stent-armed balloon as first instrument (direct stenting) in all suitable cases seems to be unstoppable and just around the corner, although certain conditions, ie, long lesions, small vessels, and bifurcation lesions, have not been solved by stenting. The British government issued a recommendation in May 2000 that all coronary lesions undergoing angioplasty be stented for safety and cost reasons, if at all feasible.23Randomized Studies With Medical Treatment or SurgeryGruentzig used to say: "If in doubt, randomize." The first randomized study comparing angioplasty with bypass surgery was indeed conceived by Gruentzig himself and conducted by one of the authors (S.B.K.). It started in 1987 and was published in 1994.24 Similar trials were published simultaneously.2526 They showed that in selected patients with multivessel disease, the outcome was not significantly different between the 2 treatment modalities in terms of mortality and subsequent infarction. However, angioplasty had a markedly higher need for subsequent reinterventions, prompted, among other things, by more persisting or recurrent symptoms.The first results emerging from trials comparing stenting with bypass surgery drew a similar picture. Yet, the need for subsequent interventions in the stenting arm was lower than it had been with the balloon alone. This appears to make stenting cost-efficient relative to bypass surgery (at least in the 1-year time frame), which prompted the British government to advocate stenting rather than surgery in cases in which both were feasible.23 Diabetic patients with multivessel disease remain a problem for interventional techniques, as shown in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Trial.27 Whether stenting and modern antiplatelet drugs will engender tighter competition for these patients remains to be seen. In parallel to angioplasty results, surgical results are improving as well, thanks to, eg, enhanced use of arterial conduits. The advent of minimally invasive surgery, new potent drugs supporting percutaneous coronary intervention (and surgery for that matter), and the possibility of hybrid procedures warrant further randomized studies.A comparison of coronary angioplasty with medical treatment was published before the trials comparing with surgery.28 Angioplasty turned out to be beneficial in terms of symptoms and exercise tolerance but not in terms of longevity in the group of patients selected for randomization (primarily single-vessel disease).In unstable patients, a strategy of immediate catheterization and possibly revascularization was not superior to medical treatment in a randomized trial.29 However, only 11% more patients were revascularized in the revascularization group than in the medical group, and a 12% first-month mortality in the patients revascularized surgically compromised the outcome of the revascularization group, in which there was no mortality with angioplasty. Another randomized study on unstable patients showed the interventional treatment to be superior to the medical treatment at 6 months.30A recent trial looking at the most common angioplasty patient, namely the one with stable coronary artery disease, found a high-dose statin regimen to be at least equal, if not superior, to angioplasty over the initial 18 months of follow-up.31 This points to the beneficial potential of statins in coronary artery disease, which should be fully exploited in the interventional arm as well.Interventions for Acute Coronary SyndromesThe appropriateness and necessity of performing coronary catheter interventions urgently for myocardial infarction or unstable angina were leading topics of the past years.In 1982, Meyer advocated, in Circulation, the recanalization by angioplasty of the acutely occluded coronary artery during the initial stage of myocardial infarction in case of failure of intracoronary streptokinase infusion.32 One year later, Serruys suggested that angioplasty should be used acutely to deal with the underlying stenosis even if intracoronary streptokinase had been successful.33 In the same year, Hartzler presented the first series in which coronary angioplasty was used as sole emergency therapy for acute myocardial infarction.34 Although a first randomized study in 1986 showed the superiority of direct angioplasty over intracoronary fibrinolysis for acute infarction, the upsurge of intravenous fibrinolysis with new drug schemes and an apparent inefficacy of associated balloon angioplasty damped the enthusiasm for acute interventions for a while. Acute coronary angioplasty for infarction was declared dead. In fact, as we know now, it had only gone into hibernation.35Randomized studies between angioplasty and intravenous fibrinolysis brought primary angioplasty back into the picture.363738 It rose like the phoenix from the ashes as the acknowledged overall best treatment for acute myocardial infarction. Currently, the combination of primary angioplasty with fibrinolytic agents in conjunction with modern antiplatelet treatment is the focus of attention.A first publication from Rotterdam, Netherlands, had shown that balloon angioplasty was feasible for unstable angina.39 As the pathophysiology of unstable angina and non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarctions has become understood to be thrombus-mediated, the combination of angioplasty and antithrombotic measures applied early has proved efficacious.30 New drugs have helped to make angioplasty for acute coronary syndromes more reliable and safe.40Help From Drugs and RadiationAcetylsalicylic acid and heparin were used in the acute phase of coronary angioplasty from the beginning without their role ever being challenged. Many other drugs came and went, such as coumarin, dextran, dipyridamole, or sulfinpyrazone for the acute phase and calcium blockers, fish oil, ACE inhibitors, statins, and others to prevent restenosis. The glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor antagonist abciximab was the first to clearly show superiority in terms of prevention of acute events.41The only nonmechanical means to reproducibly reduce restenosis appears to be the "sledgehammer" approach in the form of brachytherapy. This method was clinically applied to peripheral arteries by Liermann et al in Cologne, Germany,42 before it was used in coronary angioplasty and published in Circulation by Condado et al from Caracas, Venezuela.43 Since then, radiation with both γ- and β-sources has proved efficacious in randomized studies.44 The method has already been adopted as routine therapy for coronary angioplasty, in particular for in-stent restenosis, in a number of institutions outside the United States. Brachytherapy is expensive, is somewhat cumbersome, and requires the help of a licensed radiotherapist in most countries. Concerns about late occlusions (already observed) and late side effects (hypothetical) persist. Hence, other modes of therapy, eg, local drug delivery, coated stents, or covered stents, continue to be studied and may perhaps compete with or replace brachytherapy for prevention of restenosis.Peripheral InterventionsIt came as no surprise that coronary balloon angioplasty, a derivative of peripheral balloon angioplasty, instigated balloon angioplasty of renal and cerebral arteries as soon as it was shown to be feasible and reasonably safe. The first renal angioplasty was performed in 1978 in Bern, Switzerland, by Mahler, a former colleague of Gruentzig in the Angiology Division in Zurich, where the latter invented peripheral balloon angioplasty. Gruentzig performed a procedure himself a few days later, again on a patient under the care of one of the authors (B.M.), and was the first to publish it.45 Although the potential of this method to reduce hypertension turned out to be fairly low,46 there is an additional salutary effect on renal function. Stenting as a complement to balloon angioplasty proved helpful in ostial but not in more peripheral renal artery lesions.The first angioplasty of a cerebral artery was reported by Sundt and colleagues from Rochester, Minn, in 1980 and pertained to the basilar artery.47 Balloon angioplasty of the cervical carotid artery followed in 1980, first as an adjunct to surgical endarterectomy48 and then in 1983 as a stand-alone percutaneous procedure.49 Carotid stenting was first reported in 1995.50Stenting has been rapidly adopted as the exclusive percutaneous treatment of carotid artery stenosis.51 It was thought that the dreaded risks of peripheral embolism and also restenosis could be further reduced. However, acute local closure and restenosis with balloon angioplasty alone had never been a real problem in light of the comparatively large diameter of these vessels. Because stents did not eliminate the problem of distal embolization (and because no randomized studies exist, they might even increase it), a variety of mechanical protection systems as well as adjunctive drugs are currently under investigation.Congenital Vascular InterventionsIn pediatric cardiology, a flurry of vascular dilatation procedures were described over the last 2 decades.52 They range from congenital targets, such as stenoses in pulmonary arteries, pulmonary veins, coarctation, and patent or insufficient ductus arteriosus, to postsurgical targets, such as conduit or scar stenoses.OutlookThere is a remarkable congruence of research interests, disease pathogenesis, disease manifestations, prevention strategies, drug therapies, and finally catheter interventions in vascular problems throughout the body. This has led to a mutual fertilization among physicians dealing with these problems.The cardiologists are the caretakers of the most common vascular problem, ie, coronary artery disease. In addition, they work in fairly small arteries and have to cope with the constant motion of the heart. Consequently, they seem to have developed skills, knacks, and equipment somewhat faster and further than their colleagues dealing with other vessels. Teaming up with other specialists, on the other hand, has helped the cardiologists to understand noncardiac problems better. Together, cardiovascular catheter specialists are a tremendous asset for modern medicine and offer powerful tools and therapies for patients.This field of medicine is highly coveted by young cardiologists in training. Research support from industry has been abundant, and so far, reimbursement has been generous. Professional societies, such as the American Heart Association, the American College of Cardiology, and the European Society of Cardiology, have recognized the desirability for practitioners to have extensive experience to ensure optimal outcome. A certifying agency (installed by the American Board of Internal Medicine) has appreciated the extensive fund of knowledge encompassed by the discipline and has instituted a certifying examination to recognize experts in the field.The ghost of overuse is hovering over this discipline more than over most other medical interventions that are used less frequently. Rigorous quality control instruments have been implemented in a number of countries. They provide a certain guarantee that the catheter interventions for cardiovascular diseases are neither overused nor underused.Dotter started the discipline of percutaneous vascular interventions in the 1960s. Gruentzig contributed the balloon to make them work in the 1970s. The stent was the outstanding advent in the 1980s. New platelet antagonists, such as the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and the thienopyridins, as well as the expanded applications of interventional procedures in acute coronary syndromes and carotid arteries, were prominent in the 1990s.The first century of the new millennium should see tremendous success in prevention of these diseases, both by conventional risk factor management and by a genetic approach. The interventions will continue to abound for many years to come because of the aging population, who are well informed about treatment options and commonly subscribe to the attitude "because I am worth it."In about 50 years, prevention of atherosclerosis will be early, ubiquitous, and uninterrupted, and people will grow very old. Yet, they will no longer suffer from or die of atherosclerosis, currently the most important disease of civilized mankind. By then, the last 50 years of the past millennium will be remembered just like the tale of Atlantis, fascinating but no longer relevant.%From the Andreas R. Gruentzig Cardiovascular Institute, Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, Ga, and the Swiss Cardiovascular Center Bern, University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland. Table 1. Milestones for Human Cardiovascular Catheterizations up to 1950YearMethodPioneer1667Blood vessel accessMayor1846Dilatation of urethra with increasing catheter diametersBenique1855Balloon dilatation of urethraReybard1895X-rayRoentgen1898Contrast mediumCannon1912X-ray plates for documentationEastman Kodak1924Arteriography with contrast mediumBrooks1929Cardiac catheterizationForssmann1932CineradiographyGianturco1936Direct needle ventriculographyNuvoli1937CardioangiographyCastellanos1939Image intensifierCoolidge1941Invasive cardiac output measurementCournand1945Visualization of coronary arteriesRadnerDownload figureDownload PowerPoint Figure 1. Figure 1. F. Mason Sones (1919–1985) in the catheterization laboratory in Cleveland.Download figureDownload PowerPoint Figure 2. Figure 2. Stenosis before (a), immediately after (b), 10 years after (c), and 23 years after (d) the world's first coronary balloon angioplasty, performed by Andreas R. Gruentzig in Zurich, Switzerland, on September 16, 1977. The functional long-term success is documented by normal stress tolerance and normal exercise ECG (e) of the now 61-year-old patient, who was an age-mate of Gruentzig when he underwent the intervention at the age of 38 years.Download figureDownload PowerPoint Figure 3. Figure 3. Andreas R. Gruentzig (1939–1985) explaining a poster describing percutaneous dilatation of coronary artery stenosis to a flabbergasted crowd at the American Heart Association meeting in Miami, Fla, in November 1976.FootnotesCorrespondence to Bernhard Meier, MD, Cardiology, Swiss Cardiovascular Center Bern, University Hospital, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland. E-mail [email protected] References 1 Geddes LA, Geddes LE, Boo M, et al. The Catheter Introducers. Chicago, Ill: Mobium Press; 1983.Google Scholar2 Sones FMJ, Shirey EK, Proudfit WL, et al. Cine-coronary arteriography. Circulation.1959; 20:773. Abstract.Google Scholar3 Amplatz K. Technics of coronary arteriography. Circulation.1963; 27:101–107.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar4 Judkins MP. Selective coronary arteriography. Radiology.1967; 89:815–824.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar5 Seldinger SI. Catheter replacement of the needle in percutaneous arteriography: a new technique. Acta Radiol.1953; 39:368–376.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar6 Dotter CT, Judkins MP. Transluminal treatment of arteriosclerotic obstruction: description of a new technic and a preliminary report of its application. Circulation.1964; 3:654–670.Google Scholar7 Porstmann W. Ein neuer Korsett-Ballonkatheter zur transluminalen Rekanalisation nach Dotter unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Obliterationen an den Beckenarterien. Rad Diagn.1973; 14:239–244.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar8 Grüntzig A, Hopff H. Perkutane Rekanalisation chronischer arterieller Verschlüsse mit einem neuen Dilatationskatheter. Dtsch Med Wochenschr.1974; 99:2502–2505.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar9 Hurst JW. The first coronary angioplasty as described by Andreas Gruentzig. Am J Cardiol.1986; 57:185–186.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar10 Gruentzig A. Results from coronary angioplasty and implications for the future. Am Heart J.1982; 103:779–783.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar11 King SB III. Angioplasty from bench to bedside to bench. Circulation.1996; 93:1621–1629.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar12 Gruentzig AR, Turina MI, Schneider JA. Experimental percutaneous dilatation of coronary artery stenosis. Circulation. 1976;53(suppl II):II-81. Abstract.Google Scholar13 Grüntzig A. Transluminal dilatation of coronary-artery stenosis. Lancet.1978; 1:263.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar14 Grüntzig AR, Senning Å, Siegenthaler WE. Nonoperative dilatation of coronary-artery stenosis: percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. N Engl J Med.1979; 301:61–68.Google Scholar15 Ryan TJ, Faxon DP, Gunnar RM, et al. Guidelines for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Assessment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Cardiovascular Procedures (Subcommittee on Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty). Circulation.1988; 78:486–502.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar16 Puel J, Joffre F, Rousseau H, et al. Endo-prothèses coronariennes auto-expansives dans la prévention des resténoses après angioplastie transluminale. Arch Mal Coeur.1987; 8:1311–1312.Google Scholar17 Sigwart U, Puel J, Mirkovitch V, et al. Intravascular stents to prevent occlusion and restenosis after transluminal angioplasty. N Engl J Med.1987; 316:701–706.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar18 Roubin GS, Robinson KA, King SB III. Early and late results of intracoronary arterial stenting after coronary angioplasty in dogs. Circulation.1987; 76:891–897.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar19 Schatz RA, Palmaz JC, Tio FO, et al. Balloon-expandable intracoronary stents in the adult dog. Circulation.1987; 76:450–457.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar20 Dotter CT. Transluminally-placed coilspring endarterial tube grafts: long-term patency in canine popliteal artery. Invest Radiol.1969; 4:329–332.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar21 Meier B. New devices for coronary angioplasty: the emperor's new clothes revisited. Am J Med.1995; 98:429–431.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar22 Schömig A, Neumann FJ, Kastrati A, et al. A randomized comparison of antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy after the placement of coronary-artery stents. N Engl J Med.1996; 334:1084–1089.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar23 National Institute of Clinical Excellence (National Health Service). Guidance on coronary artery stents in the treatment of ischaemic heart disease. 2000;www.nice.org.uk.Google Scholar24 King SB III, 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; 331:1044–1050.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar25 CABRI Trial Participants. First-year results of CABRI (coronary angioplasty versus bypass revascularisation investigation). Lancet.1995; 346:1179–1184.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar26 The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Investigators. Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with angioplasty in patients with multivessel disease. N Engl J Med.1996; 335:217–225.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar27 Hlatky MA, Rogers WJ, Johnstone I, et al, for the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Investigators. Medical care costs and quality of life after randomization to coronary angioplasty or coronary bypass surgery. N Engl J Med.1997; 336:92–99.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar28 Parisi AF, Folland ED, Hartigan P. A comparison of angioplasty with medical therapy in the treatment of single-vessel coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med.1992; 326:10–16.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar29 Boden WE, O'Rourke RA, Crawford MH, et al, for the Veterans Affairs Non-Q-Wave Infarction Strategies in Hospital (VANQWISH) Trial Investigators. Outcomes in patients with acute non-Q-wave myocardial infarction randomly assigned to an invasive as compared with a conservative management strategy. N Engl J Med.1998; 338:1785–1792.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar30 FRISC Investigators and Committee Members. Invasive compared with non-invasive treatment in unstable coronary-artery disease: FRISC II prospective randomised multicentre study. Lancet.1999; 354:708–715.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar31 Pitt B, Waters D, Brown WV, et al, for the Atorvastatin Versus Revascularization Treatment Investigators. Aggressive lipid-lowering therapy compared with angioplasty in stable coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med.1999; 341:70–76.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar32 Meyer J, Merx W, Schmitz H, et al. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty after intracoronary streptokinase in evolving acute myocardial infarction. Circulation.1982; 66:905–913.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar33 Serruys PW, Wijns W, Van den Brand M, et al. Is transluminal coronary angioplasty mandatory after successful thrombolysis? Quantitative coronary angiographic study. Br Heart J.1983; 50:257–265.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar34 Hartzler GO, Rutherford BD, McConahay DR, et al. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with and without thrombolytic therapy for treatment of acute myocardial infarction. Am Heart J.1983; 106:965–973.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar35 Meier B. Balloon angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: was it buried alive? Circulation.1990; 82:2243–2245.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar36 Grines CL, Browne KF, Marco J, et al. A comparison of immediate angioplasty with thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med.1993; 328:673–679.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar37 Zijlstra F, de Boer MJ, Hoorntje JC, et al. A comparison of immediate coronary angioplasty with intravenous streptokinase in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med.1993; 328:680–684.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar38 Gibbons RJ, Holmes DR, Reeder GS, et al. Immediate angioplasty compared with the administration of a thrombolytic agent followed by conservative treatment for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med.1993; 328:685–691.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar39 De Feyter PJ, Serruys PW, Van den Brand M, et al. Emergency coronary angioplasty in refractory unstable angina. N Engl J Med.1985; 313:342–346.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar40 Topol EJ, Mark DB, Lincoff AM, et al, for the EPISTENT Investigators. Evaluation of platelet IIb/IIIa inhibitor for stenting: outcomes at 1 year and economic implications of platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade in patients undergoing coronary stenting: results from a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet.1999; 354:2019–2024.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar41 The EPIC Investigators. Use of a monoclonal antibody directed against the platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor in high-risk coronary angioplasty. N Engl J Med.1994; 330:956–961.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar42 Liermann D, Bottcher HD, Kollath J, et al. Prophylactic endovascular radiotherapy to prevent intimal hyperplasia after stent implantation in femoropopliteal arteries. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol.1994; 17:12–16.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar43 Condado JA, Waksman R, Gurdiel O, et al. Long-term angiographic and clinical outcome after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and intracoronary radiation therapy in humans. Circulation.1997; 96:732–737.Google Scholar44 Teirstein PS, Massullo V, Jani S, et al. Catheter-based radiotherapy to inhibit restenosis after coronary stenting. N Engl J Med.1997; 336:1697–1703.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar45 Gruentzig A, Kuhlmann U, Vetter W, et al. Treatment of renovascular hypertension with percutaneous transluminal dilatation of renal-artery stenosis. Lancet.1978; 1:801–802.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar46 Ritz E, Mann JF. Renal angioplasty for lowering blood pressure. N Engl J Med.2000; 342:1042–1043.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar47 Sundt TM Jr, Smith HC, Campbell JK, et al. Transluminal angioplasty for basilar artery stenosis. Mayo Clin Proc.1980; 55:673–680.MedlineGoogle Scholar48 Kerber CW, Cromwell LD, Loehden OL. Catheter dilatation of proximal carotid stenosis during distal bifurcation endarterectomy. Am J Neuroradiol.1980; 1:348–349.MedlineGoogle Scholar49 Bockenheimer SA, Mathias K. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in arteriosclerotic internal carotid artery stenosis. Am J Neuroradiol.1983; 4:791–792.MedlineGoogle Scholar50 Shawl FA. Emergency percutaneous carotid stenting during stroke. Lancet.1995; 346:1223. Letter.Google Scholar51 Yadav JS, Roubin GS, Iyer S, et al. Elective stenting of the extracranial carotid arteries. Circulation.1997; 95:376–381.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar52 Rashkind WJ, Gibson J Jr. Interventional cardiac catheterization in congenital heart disease. Int J Cardiol.1985; 7:1–11.CrossrefMedlineGoogle Scholar Previous Back to top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails November 14, 2000Vol 102, Issue suppl_4 Advertisement Article InformationMetrics Copyright © 2000 by American Heart Associationhttps://doi.org/10.1161/circ.102.suppl_4.IV-81 Originally publishedNovember 14, 2000 Keywordsstentscoronary diseaserevascularizationballoonangioplasty Advertisement SubjectsCatheter-Based Coronary and Valvular InterventionsChronic Ischemic Heart DiseaseRestenosisStent
Referência(s)