Blood Institute dynamic registry and after percutaneous coronary interventions, using the National Heart, Lung, Validation of Mayo clinic risk adjustment model for in-hospital complications

[1]  M. Bell,et al.  Correlates of procedural complicationsand a simple integer risk scorefor percutaneous coronary intervention , 2002 .

[2]  Kirit Patel,et al.  Simple Bedside Additive Tool for Prediction of In-Hospital Mortality After Percutaneous Coronary Interventions , 2001, Circulation.

[3]  W. Laskey,et al.  Changes in the practice of percutaneous coronary intervention: a comparison of enrollment waves in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) Dynamic Registry. , 2001, The American journal of cardiology.

[4]  A. Jacobs,et al.  Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the Current Era Compared With 1985–1986: The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Registries , 2000, Circulation.

[5]  M. Bell,et al.  Application of the New York State PTCA mortality model in patients undergoing stent implantation. , 2000, Circulation.

[6]  M. Bell,et al.  Prediction of death after percutaneous coronary interventional procedures. , 2000, American heart journal.

[7]  David P Miller,et al.  Relation between lesion characteristics and risk with percutaneous intervention in the stent and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa era: An analysis of results from 10,907 lesions and proposal for new classification scheme. , 1999, Circulation.

[8]  T. Ryan,et al.  Multivariate prediction of in-hospital mortality after percutaneous coronary interventions in 1994-1996. Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. , 1999, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[9]  H. White,et al.  Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. SHOCK Investigators. Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[10]  Ayah E. Johnson,et al.  Primary coronary angioplasty vs thrombolysis for the management of acute myocardial infarction in elderly patients. , 1999, JAMA.

[11]  P. Teirstein,et al.  Contemporary percutaneous treatment of unprotected left main coronary stenoses: initial results from a multicenter registry analysis 1994-1996. , 1997, Circulation.

[12]  S. Ellis,et al.  Relation of operator volume and experience to procedural outcome of percutaneous coronary revascularization at hospitals with high interventional volumes. , 1997, Circulation.

[13]  E L Hannan,et al.  Coronary angioplasty volume-outcome relationships for hospitals and cardiologists. , 1997, JAMA.

[14]  E. Topol,et al.  Analysis and comparison of operator-specific outcomes in interventional cardiology. From a multicenter database of 4860 quality-controlled procedures. , 1996, Circulation.

[15]  S. Kimmel,et al.  Development and validation of a simplified predictive index for major complications in contemporary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty practice , 1995 .

[16]  D. Pryor,et al.  The relation between the volume of coronary angioplasty procedures at hospitals treating Medicare beneficiaries and short-term mortality. , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[17]  C. Simpfendorfer,et al.  Risk stratification for long-term outcome after elective coronary angioplasty: a multivariate analysis of 5,000 patients. , 1994, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[18]  D. Hosmer,et al.  Applied Logistic Regression , 1991 .