1евразийские клинические рекомендации по диагностике и лечению стабильной ишемической болезни сердца (20202021)
 Скачать 1.31 Mb.
|
|
КЛИНИЧЕСКИЕ РЕКОМЕНДАЦИИ РЕКОМЕНДАЦИИ ЕАК 2020-2021 GUIDELINES FOR THE MANAGEMENT 2020-2021 EAC GUIDELINES 106 171. Thiele H, Neumann-Schniedewind P, Jacobs S, Boudriot E, Walther T, Mohr FW, Schuler G, Falk V. Randomized comparison of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery versus sirolimus-eluting stenting in isolated proximal left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009;53:2324–2331. 172. Capodanno D, Stone GW, Morice MC, Bass TA, Tamburino C. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery in left main coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical data. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:1426–1432. 173. Giacoppo D, Colleran R, Cassese S, Frangieh AH, Wiebe J, Joner M, Schunkert H, Kastrati A, Byrne RA. Percutaneous coronary intervention vs coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with left main coronary artery stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Cardiol 2017;2:1079–1088. 174. Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, Colombo A, Holmes DR, Mack MJ, Stahle E, Feldman TE, van den Brand M, Bass EJ, Van Dyck N, Leadley K, Dawkins KD, Mohr FW; SYNTAX Investigators S. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery dis- ease. N Engl J Med 2009;360:961–972. 175. Park SJ, Ahn JM, Kim YH, Park DW, Yun SC, Lee JY, Kang SJ, Lee SW, Lee CW, Park SW, Choo SJ, Chung CH, Lee JW, Cohen DJ, Yeung AC, Hur SH, Seung KB, Ahn TH, Kwon HM, Lim DS, Rha SW, Jeong MH, Lee BK, Tresukosol D, Fu GS, Ong TK; BEST Trial Investigators. Trial of everolimus-eluting stents or bypass surgery for coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2015;372:1204–1212. 176. Chang M, Ahn JM, Lee CW, Cavalcante R, Sotomi Y, Onuma Y, Tenekecioglu E, Han M, Park DW, Kang SJ, Lee SW, Kim YH, Park SW, Serruys PW, Park SJ. Long-term mortality after coronary revascularization in nondiabetic patients with multivessel disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2016;68:29–36 177. Head SJ, Davierwala PM, Serruys PW, et al. Coronary artery bypass grafting vs. percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with three-vessel disease: Final five-year follow-up of the SYNTAX trial. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:2821–2830. 178. Hakeem A, Garg N, Bhatti S, Rajpurohit N, Ahmed Z, Uretsky BF. Effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents compared with bypass surgery in diabetics with multivessel coronary disease: Comprehensive systematic review and meta- analysis of randomized clinical data. J Am Heart Assoc 2013;2:e000354. 179. Herbison P, Wong CK. Has the difference in mortality between percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting in people with heart disease and diabetes changed over the years? A systematic review and meta- regression. BMJ Open КЛИНИЧЕСКИЕ РЕКОМЕНДАЦИИ РЕКОМЕНДАЦИИ ЕАК 2020-2021 GUIDELINES FOR THE MANAGEMENT 2020-2021 EAC GUIDELINES 107 2015;5:e010055. 180. Kamalesh M, Sharp TG, Tang XC, Shunk K, Ward HB, Walsh J, King S III, Colling C, Moritz T, Stroupe K, Reda D; CARDS Investigators VA. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass surgery in United States veterans with diabetes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:808–816. 181. Kappetein AP, Head SJ, Morice MC, Banning AP, Serruys PW, Mohr FW, Dawkins KD, Mack MJ, Investigators S. Treatment of complex coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes: 5-year results comparing outcomes of bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention in the SYNTAX trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2013;43:1006–1013. 182. Kapur A, Hall RJ, Malik IS, Qureshi AC, Butts J, de Belder M, Baumbach A, Angelini G, de Belder A, Oldroyd KG, Flather M, Roughton M, Nihoyannopoulos P, Bagger JP, Morgan K, Beatt KJ. Randomized comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention with coronary artery bypass grafting in dia- betic patients. 1-year results of the CARDia (Coronary Artery Revascularization in Diabetes) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:432–440. 183. Koskinas KC, Siontis GC, Piccolo R, Franzone A, Haynes A, Rat-Wirtzler J, Silber S, Serruys PW, Pilgrim T, Raber L, Heg D, Juni P, Windecker S. Impact of diabetic status on outcomes after revascularization with drug-eluting stents in relation to coronary artery disease complexity: Patient-level pooled analysis of 6081 patients. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2016;9:e003255. 184. Windecker S, Stortecky S, Stefanini GG, et al. Revascularisation versus medical treatment in patients with stable coronary artery disease: Network meta-analysis. BMJ. 2014;348:g3859. 185. Bonaa KH, Mannsverk J, Wiseth R et al. Drug-eluting or bare-metal stents for coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:1242–1252. 186. Palmerini T, Benedetto U, Biondi-Zoccai G et al. Long-term safety of drug-eluting and bare- metal stents: Evidence from a comprehensive network meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:2496–2507. 187. Stefanini GG, Byrne RA, Windecker S. State of the art : coronary artery stent — past, present and future. EuroIntervention. 2017;13(6):706–716. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-17-00557 188. Sabate M, Windecker S, Iniguez A et al. Everolimus-eluting bioresorbable stent vs. durable polymer everolimus-eluting metallic stent in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Results of the randomized ABSORB ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction-TROFI II trial. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:229–240. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehv500 КЛИНИЧЕСКИЕ РЕКОМЕНДАЦИИ РЕКОМЕНДАЦИИ ЕАК 2020-2021 GUIDELINES FOR THE MANAGEMENT 2020-2021 EAC GUIDELINES 108 189. Cassese S, Byrne RA, Ndrepepa G et al. Everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus everolimus-eluting metallic stents: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Lancet. 2016;387:537–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00979-4 190. Cassese S, Byrne RA, Juni P, et al. Midterm clinical outcomes with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffolds versus everolimus-eluting metallic stents for percutaneous coronary interventions: A meta-analysis of randomized trials. EuroIntervention. 2018;13:1565–1573. https://doi.org/10.4244/EIJ-D-17-00492 191. Valgimigli M, Gagnor A, Calabro P et al. Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: A randomized multicentre trial. Lancet. 2015;385:2465—2476. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60292-6 192. Jolly SS, Yusuf S, Cairns J, et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): A randomized, parallel group, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011;377:1409–1420. 193. Ferrante G, Rao SV, Juni P, et al. Radial versus femoral access for coronary interventions across the entire spectrum of patients with coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of randomized trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:1419–1434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2016.04.014 194. Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019 Jan 7;40(2):87–165. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394 195. Gaudino M, Angelini G D, Antoniades C et al. Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: 30 Years of Debate. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018;7(16):e009934. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.118.009934 196. Melby SJ, Saint LL, Balsara K et al. Complete coronary revascularization improves survival in octogenarians. Ann Thorac Surg. 2016;102:505–511. 197. Taggart DP, Altman DG, Gray AM et al. Randomized trial of bilateral versus single internal- thoracic-artery grafts. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:2540–2549. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1610021 198. Gaudino M, Tranbaugh R, Fremes S. Bilateral versus single internal thoracic artery grafts. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:e37. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1703358 199. Gaudino M, Benedetto U, Fremes S, et al. Radial-artery or saphenous-vein grafts in coronary-artery bypass surgery. N Engl J Med. 2018; 378:2069–2077. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1716026 200. Arora RR, Chou TM, Jain D, et al. Effects of enhanced external counter pulsation on Health- КЛИНИЧЕСКИЕ РЕКОМЕНДАЦИИ РЕКОМЕНДАЦИИ ЕАК 2020-2021 GUIDELINES FOR THE MANAGEMENT 2020-2021 EAC GUIDELINES 109 Related Quality of Life continue 12 months after treatment: a sub study of the Multicenter Study of Enhanced External Counter pulsation. J Investig Med. 2002;50:25–32. 201. Zipes DP, Svorkdal N, Berman D, et al. Spinal cord stimulation therapy for patients with refractory angina who are not candidates for revascularization. Neuromodulation. 2012;15:550–558. 202. Henry TD, Losordo DW, Traverse JH et al. Autologous CD34+ cell therapy improves exercise capacity, angina frequency and reduces mortality in no-option refractory angina: a patient-level pooled analysis of randomized double-blinded trials. Eur Heart J. 2018;39:2208–2216. 203. Briones E, Lacalle JR, Marin-Leon I, Rueda JR. Transmyocardial laser revascularization versus medical therapy for refractory angina. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;2:CD003712. 204. Mohr F. W., Morice M.-C., Kappetein A. P., Feldman T. E. et al. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with three-vessel disease and left main coronary disease: 5-year follow-up of the randomised, clinical SYNTAX trial. Lancet. 2013; 381(9867):629-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60141-5 205. Ducrocq G., Wallace J. S., Baron G., Ravaud P. et al. REACH Investigators. Risk score to predict serious bleeding in stable outpatients with or at risk of atherothrombosis. Eur Heart J. 2010; 31: 1257–1265. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehq021 |