Influence of a Randomized Clinical Trial on Practice by Participating Investigators: Lessons From the Coronary Angioplasty Versus Excisional Atherectomy Trial (CAVEAT)
Open Access
- 28 February 1998
- journal article
- clinical trial
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of the American College of Cardiology
- Vol. 31 (2) , 265-272
- https://doi.org/10.1016/s0735-1097(97)00498-1
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Final Results of the Balloon vs Optimal Atherectomy Trial (BOAT)Circulation, 1998
- Our Preoccupation With Coronary LuminologyCirculation, 1995
- Observational versus randomized medical device testing before and after market approval—The atherectomy-versus-angioplasty controversyControlled Clinical Trials, 1995
- One-Year Follow-up in the Coronary Angioplasty Versus Excisional Atherectomy Trial (CAVEAT I)Circulation, 1995
- A Multicenter, Randomized Trial of Coronary Angioplasty Versus Directional Atherectomy for Patients With Saphenous Vein Bypass Graft LesionsCirculation, 1995
- A Comparison of Directional Atherectomy with Balloon Angioplasty for Lesions of the Left Anterior Descending Coronary ArteryNew England Journal of Medicine, 1993
- A Comparison of Directional Atherectomy with Coronary Angioplasty in Patients with Coronary Artery DiseaseNew England Journal of Medicine, 1993
- The applicability of the results of streamlined trials to clinical practiceStatistics in Medicine, 1990
- “Crackers, breakers, stretchers, drillers, scrapers, shavers, burners, welders and melters”—the future treatment of atherosclerotic coronary disease? A clinical-morphologic assessmentJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1989
- Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty in 1985–1986 and 1977–1981New England Journal of Medicine, 1988