Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 946

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Coronary Angioplasty with or without Stent Implantation for Acute Myocardial Infarction

Open access
Grines, Cindy L., Cox, David A., Stone, Gregg W., Garcia, Eulogio, Mattos, Luiz A., Giambartolomei, Alessandro, Brodie, Bruce R., Madonna, Olivier, Eijgelshoven, Marcel, Lansky, Alexandra J., O'Neill, William W., Morice, Marie-Claude·1999·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Coronary-stent implantation is frequently performed for treatment of acute myocardial infarction. However, few studies have compared stent implantation with primary angioplasty alone. METHODS: We designed a multicenter study to compare primary angioplasty with angioplasty accompanied by implantation of a heparin-coated Palmaz-Schatz stent. Patients with acute myocardial infarction underwent emergency catheterization and angioplasty. Those with vessels suitable for stenting were randomly assigned to undergo angioplasty with stenting (452 patients) or angioplasty alone (448 patients). RESULTS: The mean (+/-SD) minimal luminal diameter was larger after stenting than after angioplasty alone (2.56+/-0.44 mm vs. 2.12+/-0.45 mm, P<0.001), although fewer patients assigned to stenting had grade 3 blood flow (according to the classification of the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction trial) (89.4 percent, vs. 92.7 percent in the angioplasty group; P=0.10). After six months, fewer patients in the stent group than in the angioplasty group had angina (11.3 percent vs. 16.9 percent, P=0.02) or needed target-vessel revascularization because of ischemia (7.7 percent vs. 17.0 percent, P<0.001). In addition, the combined primary end point of death, reinfarction, disabling stroke, or target-vessel revascularization because of ischemia occurred in fewer patients in the stent group than in the angioplasty group (12.6 percent vs. 20.1 percent, P<0.01). The decrease in the combined end point was due entirely to the decreased need for target-vessel revascularization. The six-month mortality rates were 4.2 percent in the stent group and 2.7 percent in the angioplasty group (P=0.27). Angiographic follow-up at 6.5 months demonstrated a lower incidence of restenosis in the stent group than in the angioplasty group (20.3 percent vs. 33.5 percent, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute myocardial infarction, routine implantation of a stent has clinical benefits beyond those of primary coronary angioplasty alone.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejm199912233412601

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Grines, C. L., Cox, D. A., Stone, G. W., Garcia, E., Mattos, L. A., Giambartolomei, A., Brodie, B. R., Madonna, O., Eijgelshoven, M., Lansky, A. J., O'Neill, W. W., & Morice, M.-C.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1999-12-23
Volume
341
Issue
26
Pages
1949-1956
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2328180803
Cited by
946
References
0
FWCI
71.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.