Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass graft surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass
- 1 January 2002
- journal article
- clinical trial
- Published by Elsevier in Journal of the American College of Cardiology
- Vol. 39 (2) , 266-273
- https://doi.org/10.1016/s0735-1097(01)01720-x
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 20 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comparison of Coronary-Artery Bypass Surgery and Stenting for the Treatment of Multivessel DiseaseNew England Journal of Medicine, 2001
- Argentine randomized study: coronary angioplasty with stenting versus coronary bypass surgery in patients with multiple-vessel disease (ERACI II): 30-day and one-year follow-up resultsJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2001
- A meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing coronary artery bypass grafting with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in multivessel coronary artery diseaseThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1995
- Meta-analysis of randomised trials comparing coronary angioplasty with bypass surgeryThe Lancet, 1995
- First-year results of CABRI (Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularisation Investigation)The Lancet, 1995
- IntroductionThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1995
- A Randomized Trial Comparing Coronary Angioplasty with Coronary Bypass SurgeryNew England Journal of Medicine, 1994
- A Randomized Study of Coronary Angioplasty Compared with Bypass Surgery in Patients with Symptomatic Multivessel Coronary DiseaseNew England Journal of Medicine, 1994
- Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI): In-hospital results and 1-year follow-upJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 1993
- Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trialThe Lancet, 1993