| (Absorb, Abbott Vascular, versus everolimus-eluting metallic stent | |||
| ABSORB II, NCT01425281 | everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold (Absorb, Abbott Vascular) versus everolimus-eluting metallic stent (Xience, Abbott Vascular) | patients aged 18-85 years with evidence of myocardial ischaemia and one or two de-novo native lesions in different epicardial vessels | single blind Follow-up duration: 1 year analysis |
| 12 months dual antiplatelet versus 6 months dual antiplatelet | |||
| ISAR-SAFE, 2009 NCT00661206 | additional 6 month period of clopidogrel versus placebo | Patients on clopidogrel therapy at least 6 months after DES implantation, who do not require a reintervention | double blind Follow-up duration: 12 months |
| 24 months of dual antiplatelet treatment versus 6 months dual antiplatelet | |||
| PRODIGY, 2011 NCT00611286 | 24 months of dual antiplatelet treatment (clopidogrel plus aspirin) versus 6 months of dual antiplatelet treatment (clopidogrel plus aspirin) | patients (74 with acute coronary syndromes and 26 with stable angina) who underwent stenting | open Follow-up duration: 2 years |
| 3 months DAPT versus 12 months DAPT | |||
| OPTIMIZE, 2013 NCT01113372 | 3 months DAPT (aspirin (100-200 mg daily) and clopidogrel (75 mg daily)) versus 12 months DAPT | patients with stable coronary artery disease or history of low-risk acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing PCI with zotarolimus-eluting stents | open-label Brazil |
| 6-month dual antiplatelet therapy versus 12 months dual antiplatelet | |||
| EXCELLENT, 2011 NCT00698607 | dual antiplatelet therapy for six months versus dual antiplatelet therapy for one year | patients with coronary artery disease | |
| Abciximab versus placebo | |||
| ADMIRAL, 2001 | loading dose 250µg/kg infusion 0.125µg/kg/min for 12h versus | Primary PCI | |
| CADILLAC, 2002 | loading dose 250µg/kg infusion 0.125µg/kg/min for 12h versus | Primary PCI | |
| RAPPORT, 1998 | loading dose 250µg/kg infusion 0.125µg/kg/min for 12h versus | Primary PTCA < | |
| EPIC (with infusion), 1994 | loading dose 250µg/kg infusion 10µg/min for 12h versus | High risk for abrupt closurebitm | |
| EPILOG, 1997 | loading dose 250µg/kg infusion 0.125µg/kg/min (max 10µg) for 12h versus | Elective or urgent PCIe | |
| EPISTENT, 1998 | loading dose 250µg/kg infusion 0.125µg/kg/min for 12h versus | Elective or urgent PCI | |
| CAPTURE, 1997 | loading dose 250µg/kg infusion 10µg/min for 18-24h versus | ||
| ERASER, 1999 | loading dose µg/kg infusion µg/min for h versus | ||
| Petronio, 2002 | loading dose µg/kg infusion µg/min for h versus | ||
| Simoons, 1994 | loading dose µg/kg infusion µg/min for h versus | ||
| Kini, 2001 | loading dose µg/kg infusion µg/min for h versus | ||
| Tamburino, 2002 | loading dose µg/kg infusion µg/min for h versus | ||
| ISAR-2, 2000 | loading dose 250µg/kg infusion 10µg/min for 12h versus | PCI <48 h after MI | |
| amlodipine versus placebo | |||
| Jorgensen (NICOLE), 2001 | amlodipine (10 mg/day) versus placebo | double blind Follow-up duration: 4months | |
| Angioguard versus conventional PCI | |||
| DIPLOMATE, 2004 | Angioguard versus conventional PCI | patients with acute myocardial infarction | Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| Wang, 2003 | Angioguard versus conventional PCI | patients with acute myocardial infarction | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| AngioJet versus conventional PCI | |||
| AiMI, 2006 | AngioJet versus PCI alone | patients presenting within 12 h of symptom onset | open Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| Florence, 2004 | AngioJet versus placebo | patients with a first acute myocardial infarction | Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| AnjioJet versus conventional PCI | |||
| JETSTENT, 2010 | AngioJet rheolytic thrombectomy versus direct stenting alone | patients with ST-elevation MI and at least moderate thrombus burden | open Follow-up duration: 6 months Italy |
| aspirin versus placebo | |||
| Taylor (Perth), 1991 | aspirin, 100 mg/day after 2 weeks versus placebo | patients aged less than 70 years without acute infarction undergoing PTCA | double blind Follow-up duration: 6m |
| M-HEART II (aspirin), 1995 | aspirin 325 mg daily versus placebo | patients undergoing PTCA | double blind Follow-up duration: 6m |
| aspirin + dipyridamol versus placebo | |||
| Schwartz (Toronto), 1988 | aspirin 990 + D225 (H) versus placebo | double blind Follow-up duration: 6m Canada | |
| White (aspirin+dipiridamol), 1991 | ticlopidine 500, aspirin 650 + D225 versus | Follow-up duration: 6m | |
| Nye (Dunedin), 1990 | aspirin 300 + D225 versus placebo | NA Follow-up duration: 12m | |
| Mayo-PTCA, 1989 | aspirin 975 + D225 versus | Follow-up duration: 48h | |
| atorvastatin versus control | |||
| NAPLES II (Briguori), 2009 | atorvastatin 80 mg loading dose administered within 24 hours prior to elective PCI versus no statin therapy | Patients with coronary artery disease scheduled for elective PCI and not on statin therapy | open Follow-up duration: 24h |
| atorvastatin versus placebo | |||
| ARMYDA, 2004 | atorvastatin 40 mg/day seven days prior to the procedure versus placebo | Patients scheduled for elective PCI | double blind Follow-up duration: 1 mo |
| atorvastatin versus usual care | |||
| GAIN, 2001 | Atorvastatin 20–40 mg/d 1 d after PCI versus usual care | open Follow-up duration: 12 mo | |
| atorvastatin reload versus placebo | |||
| ARMYDA-RECAPTURE, 2009 | atorvastatin reload (80 mg 12 h before intervention, with a further 40-mg pre-procedural dose) versus placebo | patient with long-term atorvastatin treatment thereafter (40 mg/day) undergoing PCI (for stable angina or NSTEMI ACS) | double blind Follow-up duration: 30 days Italy |
| biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent | |||
| BIOFLOW-V, 0 NCT02389946 | Ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent | patients aged 18 years or older with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention | Switzerland |
| bivalirudin versus heparin + GP2b3a inhibitors | |||
| ACUITY (Stone) (bivalirudin alone), 2006 NCT00093158 | bivalirudin alone versus unfractionated heparin or enoxaparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor | patients with acute coronary syndromes | open Follow-up duration: 30 days |
| HORIZONS-AMI (Stone), 2008 NCT00433966 | Bivalirudin versus Heparin plus GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor | patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who presented within 12 hours after the onset of symptoms and who were undergoing primary PCI | open Follow-up duration: 30 days 11 countries |
| REPLACE-2, 2003 | bivalirudin, with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (Gp IIb/IIIa) inhibition on a provisional basis for complications during PCI versus heparin plus planned Gp IIb/IIIa blockade | patients undergoing urgent or elective PCI | double blind Follow-up duration: 30 days 9 countries |
| bivalirudin versus UFH | |||
| ARMYDA BIVALVE, | bivalirudin (0.75 mg/kg bolus followed by 1.75 mg/kg per hour during the procedure) versus unfractionated heparin (75 IU/kg) | patients at high bleeding risk (over 75 years of age, diabetes, reduced renal function) scheduled for PCI | |
| BAT (Bittl), 1995 | bivalirudin immediately before angioplasty. versus heparin immediately before angioplasty | patients undergoing urgent angioplasty for unstable or postinfarction angina | double blind Follow-up duration: hospital stay US |
| ISAR-REACT 3, 2008 NCT00262054 | UFH bolus of 140 U/kg versus bivalirudin (bolus of 0.75 mg/kg, followed by infusion of 1.75 mg/kg/hr) | troponin-negative patients undergoing PCI | double blind Follow-up duration: 30 days (mean) |
| REPLACE-1, 2004 | bivalirudin (0.75 mg/kg bolus, 1.75 mg/kg/h infusion during the procedure versus heparin (70 U/kg initial bolus) adjusted to ACT of 200 to 300s | patients undergoing elective or urgent revascularization | Follow-up duration: hospital stay (48h min) US |
| bivalirudin versus UFH plus tirofiban | |||
| NAPLES (Tavano), 2009 | bivalirudin monotherapy versus unfractionated heparin plus tirofiban | patients with diabetes mellitus undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention | open Follow-up duration: 30 days Italy |
| bivalirudin + eptifibatide versus heparin + GP2b3a inhibitors | |||
| Kleiman, 2002 | bivalirudin + eptifibatide versus heparin + eptifibatide | patients who underwent elective percutaneous coronary intervention | open |
| cangrelor versus clopidogrel | |||
| CHAMPION PHOENIX, 2013 NCT01156571 | bolus and infusion of cangrelor followed by 600mg clopidogrel immediately post-infusion versus loading dose of 600 mg or 300 mg of clopidogrel | patients undergoing PCI for stable angina or for acute coronary syndromes, including ST-elevation MI | double-blind Follow-up duration: 48 hours |
| cangrelor up front versus clopidogrel up front | |||
| CHAMPION-PCI, 2009 NCT00305162 | cangrelor up front (cangrelor administered before percutaneous coronary intervention and followed by clopidogrel) versus clopidogrel up front (clopidogrel followed by placebo) | high risk patients requiring PCI | double blind Follow-up duration: 48 h 14 countries |
| cangrelor up front versus delayed clopidogrel | |||
| CHAMPION-PLATFORM, 2009 NCT00385138 | cangrelor up front (cangrelor during PCI followed by 600 mg of clopidogrel) versus delayed clopidogrel (placebo during PCI followed by 600 mg of clopidogrel) | patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention | double blind Follow-up duration: 48 h 18 countries |
| cilostazol versus aspirin | |||
| Kunishima, 1997 | Cilostazol 200 mg qD unspecified durationg qD versus Aspirin 81 mg qD | ||
| cilostazol + aspirin versus aspirin | |||
| Sekiya, 1998 | Cilostazol 200 mg qD x6mos Aspirin 81 mg qD versus Coumadin unspecified regimen Aspirin 81 mg qD | ||
| cilostazol + aspirin versus ticlopidine + aspirin | |||
| Kozuma, 2001 | Cilostazol 200 mg qD x6 mos Aspirin 81–162 mg qD versus Ticlopidine 200 mg qD x6 mos Aspirin 81–162 mg qD | ||
| Ochiai, 1999 | Cilostazol 100 mg BID x6 mos Aspirin 81 mg TID versus Ticlopidine 100 mg BID x1 mo Aspirin 81 mg TID | ||
| Park, 1999 | Cilostazol 100 mg BID x6 mos Aspirin 200 mg qD versus Ticlopidine 250 mg BID x4 wks Aspirin 200 mg qD | ||
| Yoon, 1999 | Cilostazol 100 mg BID x30 days Aspirin 100 mg qD versus Ticlopidine 250 mg BID x30 days Aspirin 100 mg qD | ||
| Kamishirado, 2002 | Cilostazol 200 mg qD x6 mos Aspirin 81 mg qD versus Ticlopidine 200 mg qD x6 mos Aspirin 81 mg qD | ||
| clopidogrel + aspirin versus ticlopidine + aspirin | |||
| Müller, 2000 | Clopidogrel 75 mg qD x4 wks Aspirin 100 mg qD versus Ticlopidine 250 mg BID x4 wks Aspirin 100 mg qD | ||
| CLASSICS, 2000 | Clopidogrel 300mg x1, 75 mg qD x4 wks Aspirin 325 mg qDypñ ·` versus Ticlopidine 250 mg BID x4 wks Aspirin 325 mg qD | ||
| TOPPS, 2001 | Clopidogrel 300 mg x1, unsp. Dose x2 wks Aspirin 325 mg qD versus Ticlopidine 500 mg x1, unsp. Dose x2 wks Aspirin 325 mg qD | ||
| Piamsomboon, 2001 | Clopidogrel 300 mg x1, 75 mg qD x4 wks Aspirin 300 mg BID x4 wks, 300 mg qD versus Ticlopidine 250 mg po BID x4 wks Aspirin 300 mg BID x4 wks, 300 mg qD | ||
| clopidogrel+aspirin versus aspirin | |||
| REAL-LATE, ZEST-LATE, 2010 NCT00484926 | clopidogrel plus aspirin versus aspirin alone | patients who had received drugeluting stents and had been free of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events and major bleeding for a period of at least 12 months | open Follow-up duration: 19.2 months South Korea |
| dalteparin versus UFH | |||
| Natarajan (without antiGp2b3a), 2003 | Dalteparin 100 IU/kg bolus versus UFH 100 IU/kg bolus | Elective or urgent PCI | |
| dalteparin versus UFH + anti Gp2b3a | |||
| Natarajan (+ antiGp2b3a), 2003 | Dalteparin 70 IU/kg bolus + GP IIb/IIIa inhibitorse/p versus UFH 70 IU/kg bolus +GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors | ||
| diltiazem versus control | |||
| Corcos, 1985 | diltiazem (90 mg tid) versus | open Follow-up duration: 3 months | |
| diltiazem versus placebo | |||
| O’Keefe, 1991 | diltiazem (240-360 mg/day) versus placebo | double blind Follow-up duration: 12 months | |
| Unverdorben, 1996 | diltiazem (180 mg/day) versus placebo | double blind Follow-up duration: 4 months | |
| Diver versus conventional PCI | |||
| De Luca, 2006 | Diver versus conventional stenting | patients with anterior ST elevation myocardial infarction | open Follow-up duration: 6 months |
| PIHRATE, 2004 | Diver versus conventional PCI | patients with acute myocardial infarction | Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| REMEDIA, 2005 | Diver versus standard PCI | patients with ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction | open Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| Sardella, 2005 | Diver versus conventional PCI | patients with acute myocardial infarction | Follow-up duration: 6 months |
| elinogrel versus clopidogrel | |||
| INNOVATE PCI, NCT00751231 | versus | ||
| Endeavor stent and three months of DAPT versus standard 12-month DAPT and other DES | |||
| RESET, NCT01145079 | versus | ||
| enoxaparin versus UFH | |||
| ATOLL, 2010 | IV enoxaparin versus UFH | patients undergoing PCI for acute STEMI | open Follow-up duration: 30 days Austria, France, Germany, and US |
| Brieger, | enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin | patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) | |
| CRUISE, 2003 | Enoxaparin 0.75 mg/kg bolus versus UFH 60 IU/kg bolus, then titrated to ACT > 200 | Urgent or elective PCI | open Follow-up duration: 2,7 +30 days |
| Drozd, 2001 | Enoxaparin 1 mg/kg bolus versus UFH 100 IU/kg bolus | PCI for stable angina | Follow-up duration: 24hrs, 30 days |
| Dudek, 2000 | Enoxaparin 1 mg/kg bolus versus UFH titrated to ACT > 300 | PCI | Follow-up duration: 3à days |
| Dudek b (enox alone), 2000 | Enoxaparin 1 mg/kg bolus versus UFH titrated to ACT > 300 | PTCA complex lesionsCI | |
| Galeote, 2001 | Enoxaparin 0.75 mg/kg bolus versus UFH 70 U/kg bolus, then titrated to ACT > 200 | PTCA patients with stable/unstable angina or AMI | |
| Rabah, 1999 | Enoxaparin 1 mg/kg bolus versus UFH 10,000 IU bolus, then titrated to ACT > 300 | PCI for stable angina | open |
| STEEPLE, 2006 NCT00077844 | enoxaparin (0.5 or 0.75 mg per kilogram of body weight) versus unfractionated heparin (adjusted for activated clotting time) | elective percutaneous coronary intervention. | open |
| enoxaparin+abciximab versus UFH | |||
| Dubek b (+abciximal), 2001 | Enoxaparin 0.75 mg/kg bolus + abciximab versus UFH titrated to ACT > 300 | ||
| Eptifibatide versus placebo | |||
| ESPRIT, 2000 | loading dose 180µg/kg x2 infusion 2µg/min for 18-24h versus | Nonurgent PCI | |
| IMPACT (4h), 1995 | loading dose 90µg/kg infusion 1.0µg/kg/min for 4h versus | Elective PCI | |
| IMPACT-II (0.5µg), 1997 | loading dose 135µg/kg infusion 0.5µg/kg/min for 20-24h versus | Any PCI | |
| Harrington, 1995 | loading dose µg/kg infusion µg/min for h versus | ||
| Export versus conventional PCI | |||
| Lipiecki, 2009 | thrombus aspiration group with the Export catheter (n = 20) (Medtronic, Inc, Minneapolis, MN) versus | ||
| EXPIRA, 2005 | Export versus conventional PCI | patients with acute myocardial infarction | Follow-up duration: 1, 9 months |
| Export (Chevalier), 2008 | Export versus conventional PCI | patients with acute myocardial infarction | Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| Noel, 2005 | Export versus conventional PCI | patients with acute myocardial infarction | Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| TAPAS, 2008 ISRCTN16716833 | Export versus conventional PCI | patients with myocardial infarction | open Follow-up duration: 1,12 months Netherlands |
| FilterWire versus conventional PCI | |||
| PROMISE, 2005 | FilterWire versus control | patients with myocardial infarction with and without ST-segment elevation | open Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| UpFlow MI, 2007 | FilterWire versus PCI using regular guidewires | patients with STEMI and coronary angiographic evidence of thrombotic occlusion | open Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| FilterWireg versus conventional PCI | |||
| DEDICATION, 2008 | FilterWireg versus PCI without distal protection | patients with STEMI referred within 12 h to have PCI | open Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| fluvastatin versus placebo | |||
| FLARE, 1999 | Fluvastatin 40 mg twice daily 15–30 d before PCI versus placebo | patients undergoing PTCA | double blind Follow-up duration: 10 mo |
| LIPS, 2002 | Fluvastatin 40 mg twice daily 0–22 d after PCI versus placebo | patients with stable or unstable angina or silent ischemia and successful completion of their first PCI | double blind Follow-up duration: 45 mo (median) |
| Guardwire versus conventional PCI | |||
| ASPARAGUS, 2008 | Guardwire versus conventional PCI | patients with acute myocardial infarction | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay, 6 months |
| GuardWire versus conventional PCI | |||
| EMERALD, 2005 | GuardWire versus angioplasty without distal protection | patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction presenting within 6 hours of symptom onset and undergoing primary PCI or rescue intervention after failed thrombolysis | open Follow-up duration: 1, 6 months |
| MICADO, 2007 | GuardWire versus PCI without distal protection | Patients with AMI within 24 hours from onset | open Follow-up duration: 1, 6 months |
| Guardwire versus conventional PCI | |||
| Nanasato, 2004 | Guardwire versus conventional PCI | patients with acute myocardial infarction | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| GuardWire versus conventional PCI | |||
| Ochala, 2007 | GuardWire versus abciximab | patients with ST elevation acute myocardial infarction referred for primary percutaneous coronary intervention | open Follow-up duration: 6 months |
| Tahk, 2008 | GuardWire versus primary angioplasty without distal protection | AMI patients presenting within 12 h of onset of symptoms | open Follow-up duration: 1, 6 months |
| high-dose clopidogrel versus normal-dose clopidogrel | |||
| GRAVITAS, 2011 NCT00645918 | High-dose clopidogrel (600-mg initial dose, 150 mg daily thereafter) versus regular clopidogrel dose | patients receiving drug-eluting stents with high residual platelet activity (PRU>=230) on the regular clopidogrel dose (platelet-function tests with the VerifyNow assay 12 to 24 hours after PCI) | open Follow-up duration: 6 months North America |
| nicorandil versus control | |||
| Nishimura, 2009 | nicorandil 15 mg daily versus control | Maintenance hemodialysis patients who underwent percutaneous coronary artery intervention and had complete coronary revascularization (absence of both restenosis and de novo coronary lesion) at coronary arteriography 6 months later | open Follow-up duration: 2.7 years Japan |
| nifedipine versus placebo | |||
| Whitworth, 1986 | nifedipine (10 mg qid) versus placebo | double blind Follow-up duration: 6 months | |
| nisoldipine versus placebo | |||
| Dens (CAPARES), 2000 | nisoldipine (40 mg/day) versus placebo | double blind Follow-up duration: 6 months | |
| omeprazole versus placebo | |||
| COGENT, 2009 NCT00557921 | CGT-2168 (75-mg clopidogrel with 20 mg of omeprazole) once daily versus placebo | patients requiring clopidogrel for at least 12 months, typically following non-ST-segment-elevation ACS, STEMI, or stent implantation | double blind Follow-up duration: 133 days (mean) US, Canada, Mexico, Australia, Chile, and Europe |
| OCLA, 2008 NCT00349661 | omeprazole 20 mg daily versus placebo | patients undergoing coronary artery stent implantation | double blind Follow-up duration: 7 days France |
| pantoprazole versus omeprazole | |||
| PACA, 2009 | pantoprazole 20 mg versus omeprazole 20 mg | patients undergoing coronary stenting for non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome | Follow-up duration: 1 mo |
| pexelizumab versus placebo | |||
| APEX-AMI, 2007 NCT00091637 | pexelizumab given as a 2-mg/kg intravenous bolus prior to PCI followed by 0.05-mg/kg per hour infusion over the subsequent 24 hours versus placebo | primary angioplasty fo high risk STEMI | double blind Follow-up duration: 30 days 17 countries |
| prasugrel versus clopidogrel | |||
| TRITOM TIMI 38 (PCI subgroup), 2009 | prasugrel (60 mg loading, 10 mg maintenance) versus clopidogrel (300 mg loading, 75 mg maintenance) | subgroup of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction | |
| JUMBO-TIMI 26, 2005 | Prasugrel 3 doses versus clopidogrel 300mg loading dose followed by 75 mg daily) | patients undergoing elective or urgent percutaneous coronary intervention | double blind Follow-up duration: 30 days |
| pravastatin versus placebo | |||
| PREDICT, 1997 | Pravastatin 40 mg/d 1 d after PCI versus placebo | patient undergoing PCI | double blind Follow-up duration: 6 mo |
| prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy versus 12 months dual antiplatelet | |||
| DES-LATE, 2010 NCT00484926 | dual antiplatelet therapy (clopidogrel plus aspirin) versus aspirin alone | patients who had received drug eluting stents and had been free of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events and major bleeding for a period of at least 12 months | open Follow-up duration: 19.2 mo South Korea |
| Pronto versus conventional PCI | |||
| DEAR-MI, 2006 NCT00257153 | Pronto versus primary percutaneous coronary intervention | patients with STEMI, admitted within 12 h of symptom onset | open Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| radial versus femoral | |||
| Grinfeld, 1996 | Radial versus femoral | Diagnostic coronary angiography | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| ACCESS , 1997 | Radial (6F) versus femoral (6F) | patients undergoing PTCA | open Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| Achenbach , 2005 | Radial versus femoral | Patients age >75 undergoing coronary angiography | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| Bodi, 2008 | Right or Left radial versus femoral | Patients with STEMI for primary PCI | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| BRAFE , 1997 | Radial (6F) versus femoral (6F) | Elective PCI with stent | open Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| CARAFE , 2001 | Radial (5 or 6F) versus femoral (5F or 6F with perclose if PCI) | Coronary angiography or PCI | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| Cooper , 1999 | Radial (4F) versus femoral (5F or 6F) | Diagnostic coronary angiography | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| FARMI , 2007 | Radial (5F) versus femoral (6F) | Patients with STEMI for primary or rescue PCI | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| Gorge and Kirstein, 2001 | Radial versus femoral | Coronary angiography or PCI | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| Lange and von Boetticher, 2006 | Radial versus femoral (5F) | Coronary angiography or PCI | open Follow-up duration: End of procedure |
| Li , 2007 | Radial versus femoral | Coronary angiography or PCI | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| Mann , 1996 | Right radial (6F) versus femoral (6F) | PTCA | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| Mann , 1998 | Radial (6F) versus femoral (6F or 7F) | Patients with ACS undergoing PCI with stent | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| Monsegu , 2000 | Left radial (5F) versus femoral (4F) | Diagnostic coronary angiography | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| Moriyama , 2002 | Radial (4F) versus femoral (4F) | Diagnostic coronary angiography | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| OCTOPLUS , 2004 | Radial versus femoral | Patients age >80 undergoing coronary angiography or PCI | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| OUTCLAS , 2005 | Radial (6F) versus femoral | Outpatients referred for PCI | open Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| RADIAL AMI , 2005 | Radial versus | Patients with STEMI for primary or rescue PCI | open Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| RADIAMI , 2007 | Radial versus femoral with closure device | Patients with STEMI for primary or rescue PCI | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| Reddy , 2004 | Radial (6F) versus femoral (4F) or femoral with angioseal closure | Diagnostic coronary angiography | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| TEMPURA , 2003 | Radial (6F) versus femoral (6F) | Patients with STEMI for primary PCI | open Follow-up duration: 9 months |
| Tian , 2003 | Radial versus femoral | Diagnostic coronary angiography | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| Vazquez-Rodriguez, 2004 | Radial versus femoral | open Follow-up duration: 1 month | |
| Rescue versus conventional PCI | |||
| Dudek, 2004 | Rescue (followed by stent implantation) versus PCI with stent implantation alone | patient with acute myocardial infarction with ST segment elevation | open Follow-up duration: hospital stay |
| Kaltoft, 2006 | Rescue versus standard PCI | patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction lasting <12 hours undergoing primary PCI | open Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| NONSTOP, 2004 | Rescue versus conventional PCI | patients with acute myocardial infarction | Follow-up duration: Hospital |
| reviparin versus UFH | |||
| REDUCE, 1996 | Reviparin 7,000 IU anti-Xa versus UFH 10,000 IU bolus | PTCA with stable/unstable angina | double blind Follow-up duration: 3 days Europe and Canada |
| SCH 530348 versus placebo | |||
| TRA-PCI, 2009 NCT00132912 | SCH 530348 3 doses: 10mg, 20mg and 40mg versus placebo | patients aged 45 years or older and undergoing non-urgent PCI or coronary angiography with planned PCI | double-blind |
| SpideRX versus conventional PCI | |||
| PREMIAR, 2007 | SpideRX versus PCI without embolic protection | with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction at high risk of embolic events (including only baseline Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction grade 0 to 2 flow) | open Follow-up duration: 1, 6 months |
| sulotroban versus placebo | |||
| M-HEART II (sulotroban), 1995 | versus placebo | patients undergoing PTCA | double blind Follow-up duration: 6 months |
| thrombectomy versus conventional PCI | |||
| Ciszewski, 2011 | aspiration thrombectomy versus | high risk patients with STEMI and angiographic evidence of thrombus | |
| Liistro, 2009 | thrombus-aspiration PCI versus | patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction | |
| INFUSE AMI, 2013 | manual thrombus aspiration versus | patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction caused by proximal or mid left anterior descending artery occlusion undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention with bivalirudin anticoagulation | |
| Chao, 2008 | initial thrombosuction versus | STEMI patients within 12 h from onset | |
| MUSTELLA, | thrombectomy versus | ||
| TROPHI, | thrombectomy versus | ||
| thrombectomy versus PCI only | |||
| TASTE (Fröbert), 2013 NCT01093404 | manual thrombus aspiration followed by PCI versus | patients with STEMI undergoing PCI | |
| TOTAL, 2015 NCT01149044 | routine upfront manual thrombectomy versus PCI alone | patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary PCI | |
| ticlopidine versus placebo | |||
| TACT, 1990 | ticlopidine 500, aspirin 650 + D225 versus | Follow-up duration: 6m | |
| White (ticlopidine), 1991 | ticlopidine 500, aspirin 650 + D225 versus placebo | Follow-up duration: 6m | |
| ticlopidine + aspirin versus aspirin | |||
| STARS (vs aspirin), 1998 | Ticlopidine 250 mg BID 4 wks Aspirin 325 mg qDDage/pj versus Aspirin 325 mg qD | ||
| Hall, 1996 | Ticlopidine 250 mg BID 1 mo Aspirin 325 mg qD 5 days versus Aspirin 325 mg qD | ||
| ticlopidine + aspirin versus coumadin + aspirin | |||
| STARS (vs coumadin+asp), 1998 | Ticlopidine 250 mg BID x4 wks Aspirin 325 mg qD versus Coumadin INR 2–2.5 x4 wks Aspirin 325 mg qDBID | ||
| FANTASTIC, 1998 | Ticlopidine 250 mg BID 6 wks Aspirin 100–325 mg qD versus Coumadin INR† 2.5–3.0 6 wks Aspirin 100–325 mg qD/pj | ||
| ISAR, 1996 | Ticlopidine 250 mg BID 4 wks Aspirin 100 mg BIDage/pj versus Coumadin INR 3.5–4.5 4 wks Aspirin 100 mg BID | ||
| MATTIS, 1998 | Ticlopidine 250 mg BID 30 days Aspirin 250 mg qD versus Coumadin INR 2.5–3.0 x30 days Aspirin 250 mg qDg qD/pj | ||
| Foussas, 2000 | Ticlopidine 500mg qD 1 mo Aspirin 325 mg qD versus Coumadin INR 2–3 x4 wks Aspirin 325 mg qDg BID | ||
| Tirofiban versus placebo | |||
| RESTORE, 1997 | loading dose 10µg/kg infusion 0.15µg/kg/min for 36h versus | PCI <72 h after USA or MI | |
| Kereiakis, 1996 | loading dose µg/kg infusion µg/min for h versus | ||
| triple antiplatelet versus dual antiplatelet therapy | |||
| CILON-T, 2010 | triple antiplatelet therapy with aspirin, clopidogrel, and cilostazol for 6 month versus dual antiplatelet therapy | real-world patients undergoing PCI | Follow-up duration: 6 mo |
| triple therapy versus dual antiplatelet therapy | |||
| WOEST, NCT00769938 | oral anticoagulants, aspirin and clopidogrel versus oral anticoagulants, clopidogrel | ||
| TVAC versus conventional PCI | |||
| VAMPIRE, 2004 | TVAC versus conventional PCI | patients with acute myocardial infarction | Follow-up duration: 8 months |
| various statins versus placebo | |||
| Briguori, 2004 | physician preference 3–31 d before PCI versus placebo | Follow-up duration: <24h | |
| verapamil versus placebo | |||
| Hoberg, 1994 | verapamil (240 mg bid) versus placebo | double blind Follow-up duration: 6 months | |
| X-sizer versus conventional PCI | |||
| Beran, 2002 | X-sizer versus conventional PCI | patients with ACS and suspected intracoronary thrombus | open Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| Napodano, 2003 | X-sizer versus conventional strategy of stenting | patients with AMI and angiographic evidence of intraluminal thrombus | open Follow-up duration: 1 month |
| X AMINE ST, 2005 | X-sizer versus standard PCI | patients with AMI <12 h and initial TIMI flow grade 0 to 1 and who were treated by PCI | open Follow-up duration: 1, 6 months |
-
About
-
Browse pathology
|
treatment
-
Site map
-
Credits
Made with in Lyon
-
Contact us
-
Privacy policy
-
