Читать книгу Practical Cardiovascular Medicine - Elias B. Hanna - Страница 161

1 53. Hochman JS, Lamas GA, Buller CE, et al. Coronary intervention for persistent occlusion after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2395–407.

2 54. Menon V, Pearte CA, Buller CE, et al. Lack of benefit from percutaneous intervention of persistently occluded infarct arteries after the acute phase of myocardial infarction is time dependent: insights from Occluded Artery Trial. Eur Heart J 2009; 30: 183–91.

3 55. Schdmig A, Mehilli J, Antoniucci D, et al.; Beyond 12 hours Reperfusion AlternatiVe Evaluation (BRAVE-2) Trial Investigators. Mechanical reperfusion in patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting more than 12 hours from symptom onset: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2005; 293: 2865–72. In this study, late reperfusion 12–48 h improved LV infarct size. ~50% of these patients had subtotal occlusion, mostly with TIMI 2–3 flow.

4 56. Busk M, Kaltoft A, Nielsen SS, et al. Infarct size and myocardial salvage after primary angioplasty in patients presenting with symptoms for <12 h vs. 12–72 h. Eur Heart J 2009; 30: 1322–30. When the infarct artery is patent (TIMI 1–3), late presenters >12 h derive the same percent salvage of the infracted territory as early presenters <12 h.

5 57. Sim DS, Jeong MH, Ahn Y, et al. Benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention in early latecomers with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol 2012; 110: 1275–81.

6 58. Udelson JE, Pearte CA, Kimmelstiel CD, et al. The occluded artery trial (OAT) viability ancillary study (OAT-NUC): impact of infarct zone viability on left ventricular remodeling after percutaneous coronary intervention versus optimal medical therapy alone. Am Heart J 2011; 161: 611–21.

7 59. Erne P, Schoenenberger AW, Burchkardt D, et al. Effects of percutaneous coronary interventions in silent ischemia after myocardial infarction. The SWISSI 2 randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2007; 297: 1985–91.