Rebuttal: Use of embolic protection devices in saphenous vein graft interventions: The ongoing challenge

2011 ◽  
Vol 84 (1) ◽  
pp. E5-E6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neeraj Badhey ◽  
Subhash Banerjee ◽  
Emmanouil S. Brilakis
Keyword(s):  
Saphenous Vein ◽  
Vein Graft ◽  
Saphenous Vein Graft ◽  
Embolic Protection ◽  
Protection Devices

scholarly journals Contemporary Use of Embolic Protection Devices During Saphenous Vein Graft Intervention

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Javier A. Valle ◽  
Thomas J. Glorioso ◽  
Katherine B. Schuetze ◽  
Gary K. Grunwald ◽  
Ehrin J. Armstrong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Saphenous Vein ◽  
Vein Graft ◽  
Saphenous Vein Graft ◽  
Embolic Protection ◽  
Protection Devices ◽  
Saphenous Vein Graft Intervention

Contemporary use of embolic protection devices in saphenous vein graft interventions: Insights from the stenting of saphenous vein grafts trial

2010 ◽  
Vol 76 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neeraj Badhey ◽  
Christopher Lichtenwalter ◽  
James A. de Lemos ◽  
Michele Roesle ◽  
Owen Obel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Saphenous Vein ◽  
Vein Graft ◽  
Saphenous Vein Graft ◽  
Embolic Protection ◽  
Vein Grafts ◽  
Saphenous Vein Grafts ◽  
Protection Devices

Role of embolic protection devices in ostial saphenous vein graft lesions

2012 ◽  
Vol 80 (7) ◽  
pp. 1120-1126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdul-Rahman R. Abdel-Karim ◽  
Aristotelis C. Papayannis ◽  
Arif Mahmood ◽  
Tesfaldet T. Michael ◽  
Bavana V. Rangan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Saphenous Vein ◽  
Vein Graft ◽  
Saphenous Vein Graft ◽  
Embolic Protection ◽  
Protection Devices

scholarly journals Safety and Efficacy of Embolic Protection Devices in Saphenous Vein Graft Interventions: A Propensity Score Analysis—Multicenter SVG PCI PROTECTA Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 1198
Author(s):  
Wojciech Wańha ◽  
Maksymilian Mielczarek ◽  
Natasza Gilis-Malinowska ◽  
Tomasz Roleder ◽  
Marek Milewski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Propensity Score ◽  
Saphenous Vein ◽  
Vein Graft ◽  
Propensity Score Analysis ◽  
Saphenous Vein Graft ◽  
Embolic Protection ◽  
Score Analysis ◽  
Protection Devices ◽  
One Year

Background: Evidence concerning the efficacy of the embolic protection devices (EPDs) in saphenous vein graft (SVG) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is sparse. The study was designed to compare major cardiovascular events of all-comer population of SVG PCI with and without EPDs at one year of follow-up. Methods and results: A multi-center registry comparing PCI with and without EPDs in consecutive patients undergoing PCI of SVG. The group comprised 792 patients, among which 266 (33.6%) had myocardial infarction (MI). The primary composite endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) defined as death, MI, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and stroke assessed at one year. After propensity score analysis, there were no differences in MACCE (21.9% vs. 23.9%; HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.57–1.45, p = 0.681, respectively) nor in secondary endpoints of death, MI, TVR, target lesion revascularization (TLR) and stroke at one year in EPDs PCI group vs. no-EPDs PCI group. Similarly, there were no differences between groups in the study endpoints at 30 days follow-up. Conclusions: There were no clinical benefit for routine use of EPDs during SVG PCI in short and long-term follow-up. Further studies are warranted to explore the effect of individual types of EPDs on clinical outcomes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document