+ Site Statistics
References:
52,572,879
Abstracts:
28,705,754
PMIDs:
27,750,366
DOIs:
25,464,004
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Complete Versus Culprit-Only Intervention in Patients With ACS: Does the Duration of DAPT Matter?



Complete Versus Culprit-Only Intervention in Patients With ACS: Does the Duration of DAPT Matter?



Journal of the American College of Cardiology 73(4): 532-533




Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 066446679

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 30704589

DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.11.029


Related references

Short versus prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration after coronary stent implantation: A comparison between the DAPT study and 9 other trials evaluating DAPT duration. Plos One 12(9): E0174502, 2017

Complete Versus Culprit-Only Lesion Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 72(17): 1989-1999, 2018

Do The Dapt And Precise-Dapt Scores Provide Concordant Recommendations For Duration Of P2Y12 Inhibitor Treatment After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention?. Canadian Journal of Cardiology 34(10): S12-S13, 2018

Design and rationale of the Complete trial: A randomized, comparative effectiveness study of complete versus culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention to treat multivessel coronary artery disease in patients presenting with St-segment elevation myocardial infarction. American Heart Journal 215: 157-166, 2019

TCT-5 Complete versus Culprit only lesion intervention in ACS Patients with multi-vessel disease: Incidence and outcomes from The London Heart Attack Group. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 70(18): B2-B3, 2017

Complete versus culprit only lesion intervention in Acs patients with multi-vessel disease: Incidence and outcomes from the London heart attack group. Atherosclerosis 275: e234-e235, 2018

Complete versus culprit-only revascularization during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease: a meta-analysis. Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences 29(3): 140-149, 2013

Complete versus culprit-only revascularization in patients with multi-vessel disease undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis of randomized trials. International Journal of Cardiology 186: 98-103, 2016

Complete Versus Culprit-Only Revascularization for Patients With Multi-Vessel Disease Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 88(4): 501-505, 2015

Culprit-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention followed by contralateral angiography versus complete angiography in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Texas Heart Institute Journal 39(3): 359-364, 2012

TCT-139 A randomized trial of complete versus culprit-only revascularization during primary percutaneous coronary intervention in diabetic patients with acute ST elevation myocardial infarction and multi vessel disease. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 68(18): B56-B57, 2016

A Randomized Trial of Complete Versus Culprit-Only Revascularization During Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Diabetic Patients With Acute ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multi Vessel Disease. Journal of Interventional Cardiology 29(3): 241-247, 2017

Culprit-lesion revascularization versus complete revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents. 2008

Complete versus culprit vessel percutaneous coronary intervention in multivessel disease: a randomized comparison. American Heart Journal 148(3): 467-474, 2004

How strong is the evidence of culprit-lesion only versus complete multivessel percutaneous intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction?. International Journal of Cardiology 223: 171-172, 2016