<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Gomes, R.S.</title>
    <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/15237/</link>
    <description>List of Publications</description>
    <language>en</language>
    
    <item>
      <title>Three-Year Outcome After Coronary Stenting Versus Bypass Surgery for the Treatment of Multivessel Disease (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/4671/</link>
      <pubDate>2004-03-09T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Background— The primary results of Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study reported a greater need for repeated revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting (PCI). However, PCI was less expensive than coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and offered the same degree of protection against death, stroke, and myocardial infarction.

Methods and Results— Patients with multivessel disease (n=1205) were randomly assigned to either CABG or PCI and followed up for up to 3 years. Survival rates without stroke or myocardial infarction were similar in each group at 1 year and 3 years (90.5% versus 91.4% for PCI versus CABG at 1 year and 87.2% versus 88.4% for PCI versus CABG at 3 years). However, the respective repeat revascularization rates were 21.2% and 26.7% at 1 and 3 years in patients allocated to PCI, compared with 3.8% and 6.6% in patients allocated to CABG (P&lt;0.0001). Diabetes (P&lt;0.0009) and maximal pressure for stent deployment (P&lt;0.002) are the strongest independent predictors of events at 3 years after PCI, whereas left anterior descending coronary artery grafting (P&lt;0.006) is the best predictor of event-free survival at 3 years after CABG. The incremental cost of surgery compared with PCI for an event-free patient was 19 257  at 1 year but decreased to 10 492  at 3 years. It remained at 142 391  at 3 years when revascularization procedures were excluded in the efficacy end point, however.

Conclusions— Three-year survival rates without stroke and myocardial infarction are identical in both groups, and the cost/benefit ratio of stenting is determined primarily by the increasing need for revascularization in the PCI group.</description>
    </item> <item>
      <title>Direct stenting with the Bx VELOCITY balloon-expandable stent mounted on the Raptor rapid exchange delivery system versus predilatation in a European randomized Trial: the VELVET trial. (Article)</title>
      <link>http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/4752/</link>
      <pubDate>2003-03-01T00:00:00Z</pubDate>
      <description>Abstract

AIMS: This study examined the six-month angiographic results of direct coronary stenting, and compared the nine-month safety, efficacy and cost of this strategy versus stenting after balloon predilatation.

METHODS: In phase I of VELVET, 122 patients (mean age = 62.3 +/- 10.1 years, 77% male, 11% with diabetes) with angina pectoris or myocardial ischemia resulting from a single de novo 51% to 95% coronary stenosis underwent direct stenting. The endpoints of phase I included angiographic findings and rates of major adverse cardiac events up to six months of follow-up. In phase II, 401 patients (mean age = 61.3 +/- 10.8 years, 79% male, 16% with diabetes) with angina pectoris or documented myocardial ischemia resulting from single or multiple, de novo or restenotic, coronary lesions were randomized between direct stenting and stenting after predilatation. The immediate angiographic results, and clinical outcomes and costs associated with the two treatment strategies up to nine months of follow-up were compared.

RESULTS: In phase I the mean diameter stenosis immediately before and after the procedure, and at six months was 61.7+/-9.4%, 13.5+/-6.3%, and 33.6+/-16.2%, respectively. The six-month binary restenosis rate was 11%. The overall rate of major adverse cardiac events, including two non-cardiac deaths, was 9.8%. In phase II, the success rates of the intended delivery strategies were 87.9% and 97.9% for direct stenting and predilatation, respectively (p &lt; 0.001), while the procedural success rates were similar (93.9% vs 96.5%). Over a follow-up period of nine months, major adverse cardiac events rates were 12.0% and 10.9% in patients randomized to direct stenting and predilatation, respectively (non-significant). Analyses of the costs incurred up to nine months in each treatment group revealed a mean saving of e362 per patient in favor of the direct stenting strategy (non-significant).

CONCLUSIONS: Compared with a strategy of stenting preceded by balloon dilatation, direct stenting was associated with an equivalent procedural success rate, equivalent clinical results up to nine months of follow-up, and a reduction in procedural and in-hospital costs (p &lt; 0.0001 and p &lt; 0.001, respectively), that was no longer significant after nine months.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>