Free Access
Med Sci (Paris)
Volume 30, Number 3, Mars 2014
Page(s) 303 - 310
Section M/S Revues
Published online 31 March 2014
  1. Morice MC, Serruys PW, Sousa JE, et al. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med 2002 ; 346 : 1773–1780. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cox DA, et al. A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2004 ; 350 : 221–231. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Stettler C, Wandel S, Allemann S, et al. Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis. Lancet 2007 ; 370 : 937–948. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Raber L, Magro M, Stefanini GG, et al. Very late coronary stent thrombosis of a newer-generation everolimus-eluting stent compared with early-generation drug-eluting stents: a prospective cohort study. Circulation 2012 ; 125 : 1110–1121. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Kimura T, Morimoto T, Nakagawa Y, et al. Very late stent thrombosis and late target lesion revascularization after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation: five-year outcome of the j-Cypher Registry. Circulation 2012 ; 125 : 584–591. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Cook S, Wenaweser P, Togni M, et al. Incomplete stent apposition and very late stent thrombosis after drug-eluting stent implantation. Circulation 2007 ; 115 : 2426–2434. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Hassan AK, Bergheanu SC, Stijnen T, et al. Late stent malapposition risk is higher after drug-eluting stent compared with bare-metal stent implantation and associates with late stent thrombosis. Eur Heart J 2010 ; 31 : 1172–1180. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Kolandaivelu K, Swaminathan R, Gibson WJ, et al. Stent thrombogenicity early in high-risk interventional settings is driven by Stent design and deployment and protected by polymer-drug coatings. Circulation 2011 ; 123 : 1400–1409. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Baber U, Mehran R, Sharma SK, et al. Impact of the everolimus-eluting Stent on Stent thrombosis: a meta-analysis of 13 randomized trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011 ; 58 : 1569–1577. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Bangalore S, Kumar S, Fusaro M, et al. Short- and long-term outcomes with drug-eluting and bare-metal coronary Stents: a mixed-treatment comparison analysis of 117 762 patient-years of follow-up from randomized trials. Circulation 2012 ; 125 : 2873–2891. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Windecker S, Serruys PW, Wandel S, et al. Biolimus-eluting Stent with biodegradable polymer versus sirolimus-eluting Stent with durable polymer for coronary revascularisation (LEADERS): a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2008 ; 372 : 1163–1173. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Stefanini GG, Kalesan B, Serruys PW, et al. Long-term clinical outcomes of biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting Stents versus durable polymer sirolimus-eluting Stents in patients with coronary artery disease (LEADERS): 4 year follow-up of a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2011 ; 378 : 1940–1948. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Nishio S, Kosuga K, Igaki K, et al. Long-term (> 10 years) clinical outcomes of first-in-human biodegradable poly-l-lactic acid coronary Stents: Igaki-Tamai Stents. Circulation 2012 ; 125 : 2343–2353. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Ormiston JA, Serruys PW, Regar E, et al. A bioabsorbable everolimus-eluting coronary Stent system for patients with single de-novo coronary artery lesions (ABSORB): a prospective open-label trial. Lancet 2008 ; 371 : 899–907. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Okamura T, Garg S, Gutierrez-Chico JL, et al. In vivo evaluation of Stent strut distribution patterns in the bioabsorbable everolimus-eluting device: an OCT ad hoc analysis of the revision 1.0 and revision 1.1 Stent design in the ABSORB clinical trial. EuroIntervention 2010 ; 5 : 932–938. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Waksman R. Current state of the absorbable metallic (magnesium) Stent. EuroIntervention 2009 ; 5 (suppl F) : F94–F97. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Lafont A, Durand E. ART: concept of a bioresorbable Stent without drug elution. EuroIntervention 2009 ; 5 (suppl F) : F83–F87. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Durand E, Lemitre M, Couty L, et al. Adjusting a polymer formulation for an optimal bioresorbable Stent: a 6-month follow-up study. EuroIntervention 2012 ; 8 : 242–249. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Jabara R, Pendyala L, Geva S, et al. Novel fully bioabsorbable salicylate-based sirolimus-eluting Stent. EuroIntervention 2009 ; 5 (suppl F) : F58–64. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Van Geuns RJ, Tamburino C, Fajadet J, et al. Self-expanding versus balloon-expandable Stents in acute myocardial infarction: results from the APPOSITION II study: self-expanding Stents in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2012 ; 5 : 1209–1219. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.