Good, better or best - What to choose?
暂无分享,去创建一个
[1] A. Roguin,et al. Ultrathin Bioresorbable-Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Thin Durable-Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization: 3-Year Outcomes From the Randomized BIOFLOW V Trial. , 2020, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.
[2] C. Terkelsen,et al. Randomized Comparison of the Polymer-Free Biolimus-Coated BioFreedom Stent With the Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Orsiro Stent in an All-Comers Population Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , 2020, Circulation.
[3] M. Stoel,et al. Thin Composite-Wire-Strut Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Ultrathin-Strut Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in BIONYX at 2 Years. , 2020, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.
[4] A. Matteau,et al. Safety and performance of the Orsiro sirolimus eluting stent in the treatment of all-comers patient population in daily clinical practice. , 2020, Cardiovascular revascularization medicine : including molecular interventions.
[5] S. Pocock,et al. 1-Year Clinical Outcomes of All Comers Treated With 2 Bioresorbable Polymer-Coated Sirolimus-Eluting Stents: Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of the COMBO and Ultrathin-Strut Orsiro Stents. , 2020, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.
[6] M. Stoel,et al. Thin, Very Thin, or Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable- or Durable-Polymer-Coated Drug-Eluting Stents: 3-Year Outcomes of BIO-RESORT. , 2019, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.
[7] H. Schunkert,et al. Ten-Year Clinical Outcomes From a Trial of Three Limus-Eluting Stents With Different Polymer Coatings in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: Results From the ISAR-TEST 4 Randomized Trial , 2019, Circulation.
[8] M. Stoel,et al. Two-year clinical outcome of all-comers treated with three highly dissimilar contemporary coronary drug-eluting stents in the randomised BIO-RESORT trial. , 2018, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.
[9] J. Massaro,et al. Subgroup Analysis Comparing Ultrathin, Bioresorbable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Thin, Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: BIOFLOW V Acute Coronary Syndromes Subgroup , 2018, Circulation. Cardiovascular Interventions.
[10] A. Roguin,et al. Ultrathin Bioresorbable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Thin Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents. , 2018, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.
[11] L. Räber,et al. Unselected Use of Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Coronary Revascularization , 2018, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.
[12] J. Massaro,et al. Ultrathin, bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents versus thin, durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients undergoing coronary revascularisation (BIOFLOW V): a randomised trial , 2017, The Lancet.
[13] R. Virmani,et al. Neoatherosclerosis: overview of histopathologic findings and implications for intravascular imaging assessment. , 2015, European heart journal.
[14] P. Serruys,et al. Comparison of Zotarolimus- and Everolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents , 2015, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.
[15] K. Stangl,et al. Comparison of a Novel Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent With a Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent: Results of the Randomized BIOFLOW-II Trial , 2015, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.
[16] J. Brachmann,et al. Five-year results of the BIOFLOW-III Registry: Real-world experience with a biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent. , 2019, Cardiovascular revascularization medicine : including molecular interventions.