Trial-Results center  
Clinical trial results database Feedback    Home


Related trials

TRIANA, 2009 - primary ballon angioplasty vs tenecteplase

DEBATER (SES vs BMS), 2009 - sirolimus ES vs bare-metal stent

NORDISTEMI, 2009 - thrombolysis + angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis

Juwana, 2009 - sirolimus ES vs paclitaxel ES

ZEST AMI (vs PES), 2009 - zotarolimus ES vs paclitaxel ES

PASEO, 2009 - drug ES vs bare-metal stent

ZEST AMI (vs SES), 2009 - zotarolimus ES vs sirolimus ES

CARESS, 2008 - thrombolysis + angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis

HORIZONS-AMI Stent, 2008 - paclitaxel ES vs bare-metal stent

MISSION, 2008 - sirolimus ES vs bare-metal stent

DEDICATION, 2008 - drug ES vs bare-metal stent

Díaz de la Llera, 2007 - sirolimus ES vs bare-metal stent

SESAMI, 2007 - sirolimus ES vs bare-metal stent

PROSIT, 2006 - sirolimus ES vs paclitaxel ES

HAAMU-STENT, 2006 - paclitaxel ES vs bare-metal stent

PASSION, 2006 - paclitaxel ES vs bare-metal stent

WEST, 2006 - systematic PCI (+stent) vs no systematic PCI

TYPHOON, 2006 - sirolimus ES vs bare-metal stent

ZWOLLE 6, 2005 - primary stenting vs ballon angioplasty

CAPITAL AMI, 2005 - systematic PCI (+stent) vs no systematic PCI

senior PAMI, 2005 - primary PCI vs thrombolytic therapy

CAPITAL AMI, 2005 - thrombolysis + angioplasty vs immediate thrombolysis

Di Lorenzo et al., 2005 - sirolimus ES vs paclitaxel ES

GRACIA-1, 2004 - systematic PCI (+stent) vs no systematic PCI

MERLIN (Sutton), 2004 - immediate systematic ballon angioplastyte vs no immediate angioplasty



See also:

  • All acute myocardial infarction clinical trials
  • All clinical trials of PCI
  • All clinical trials of primary stenting
    		•  

    ZWOLLE 6 study, 2005

    Treatments

    Studied treatment stenting
    Control treatment balloon angioplasty
    Remarks randomisation before angiography
    Treatments description
    stent type various 

    Patients

    Patients unselected patients with STEMI
    Baseline characteristics
    Age 61y 
    male (%) 77% 

    Method and design

    Randomized effectives 785 / 763 (studied vs. control)
    Design Parallel groups
    Blinding open
    Follow-up duration 12 months


    Results

    Endpoint Studied treat.
    n/N     Control treat.
    n/N     Graph RR [95% CI]

    All cause death

    25 / 785
         34 / 763
         0,71 [0,43;1,19]

    long term MI

    61 / 785
         49 / 763
         1,21 [0,84;1,74]

    long term revascularization

    136 / 785
         147 / 763
         0,90 [0,73;1,11]

    Long term death

    47 / 785
         45 / 763
         1,02 [0,68;1,51]

    reinfarction

    40 / 785
         30 / 763
         classic 1,30 [0,82;2,06]

    Revascularization

    50 / 785
         46 / 763
         1,06 [0,72;1,56]     0 2 1.0

    Relative risks
    Endpoint Events (%) Relative Risk 95% CI Endpoint definition
    in the trial    		 Ref
    Studied treat. Control treat.
    All cause death 25 / 785 (3,2%) 34 / 763 (4,5%) 0,71 [0,43;1,19]   9850 
    long term MI 61 / 785 (7,8%) 49 / 763 (6,4%) 1,21 [0,84;1,74]   9850 
    long term revascularization 136 / 785 (17,3%) 147 / 763 (19,3%) 0,90 [0,73;1,11]   9850 
    Long term death 47 / 785 (6,0%) 45 / 763 (5,9%) 1,02 [0,68;1,51]   9850 
    reinfarction 40 / 785 (5,1%) 30 / 763 (3,9%) 1,30 [0,82;2,06]   9850 
    Revascularization 50 / 785 (6,4%) 46 / 763 (6,0%) 1,06 [0,72;1,56]   9850 
    The primary endpoint (if exists) appears in blod characters
    Reference(s) used for data extraction:
  • 9850: De Luca G, Suryapranata H, Stone GW, Antoniucci D, Biondi-Zoccai G, Kastrati A, Chiariello M, Marino PCoronary stenting versus balloon angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: a meta-regression analysis of randomized trials.Int J Cardiol 2008;126:37-44
  • 0:

    • Endpoint studied treat. control treat. mean diff

    Absolute risk reduction
    Endpoint Events rate Absolute risk
    reduction (ARR)
    Studied treat. Control treat.
    All cause death 3,18% 4,46% -12,7‰
    long term MI 7,77% 6,42% 1,3%
    long term revascularization 17,32% 19,27% -19,4‰
    Long term death 5,99% 5,90% 0,9‰
    reinfarction 5,10% 3,93% 1,2%
    Revascularization 6,37% 6,03% 3,4‰


    Reference(s)

    Trials register # NA
    • Suryapranata H, De Luca G, van 't Hof AW, Ottervanger JP, Hoorntje JC, Dambrink JH, Gosselink AT, Zijlstra F, de Boer MJ. Is routine stenting for acute myocardial infarction superior to balloon angioplasty? A randomised comparison in a large cohort of unselected patients.. Heart 2005;91:641-5
      Pubmed | Hubmed | Fulltext
    • De Luca G, Suryapranata H, van't Hof AW, Ottervanger JP, Hoorntje JC, Dambrink JH, Gosselink AT, de Boer MJ. Routine stenting vs. balloon angioplasty in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction due to proximal left anterior descending coronary artery occlusion.. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown) 2009 Jan;10:22-6
      Pubmed | Hubmed | Fulltext

    (c) 2004-2010 TrialResults-center - All Rights Reserved

    Tweet this  |  notify a friend