Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
.jpg "Research Chemical Sciences")
.png "Research Chemical Sciences")
For the past received drug-eluting stents, coronary restenosis patients the RPL32 best treatment is unknown. Robert A Byrne designed to compare the paclitaxel-eluting balloon (PEB), paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of these patients. Its results were published in The Lancet 12 online journals.In this study, a randomized, open-label study, patient inclusion criteria: age over 18 years, prior any limus eluting stent implantation, coronary restenosis after RPL36A stent implantation at least 50% of these patients in 2009 August 3 to October 27, 2011 from the three centers in Germany. These patients in accordance with the ratio of 1:1:1 randomly assigned to a the PEB group, PES group or balloon angioplasty surgery group, in accordance with patients receiving treatment center for patients stratified according to sealed opaque envelopes computer generated RPL39L serial number patients randomized. Patients and researchers know that the treatment program, patients receive the occurrence and angiographic evaluation of cardiovascular events in patients with researchers do not know the patients receive treatment program. The primary endpoint of the study is stenosis diameter at 6-8 month follow-up angiography Evaluation. By intention to treat analysis of the results of the RPL4 study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov.
402 patients, of which 34% were to the PEB group, 33% were to the PES group, 33% were to the balloon angioplasty group. Among them, 84% of subjects accepted angiographic follow-up after the June-August. The research results show that the RPL9 diameter stenosis evaluation prompted PEB group of not less than the PES group, 38.0% and 37.4%, respectively, a difference of 0.6%, the difference was no statistically significant difference. The analysis has also been a consistent conclusion for each program. PEB and PES better than simple balloon angioplasty. The subjects of mortality, MI, or target lesion at embolization there was no difference between the groups.The study results suggest that the exclusion of patients with stent implantation again the need for the implantation of drug-eluting stents again coronary stenosis, PEB is an effective treatment program.
Creative Biomart
402 patients, of which 34% were to the PEB group, 33% were to the PES group, 33% were to the balloon angioplasty group. Among them, 84% of subjects accepted angiographic follow-up after the June-August. The research results show that the RPL9 diameter stenosis evaluation prompted PEB group of not less than the PES group, 38.0% and 37.4%, respectively, a difference of 0.6%, the difference was no statistically significant difference. The analysis has also been a consistent conclusion for each program. PEB and PES better than simple balloon angioplasty. The subjects of mortality, MI, or target lesion at embolization there was no difference between the groups.The study results suggest that the exclusion of patients with stent implantation again the need for the implantation of drug-eluting stents again coronary stenosis, PEB is an effective treatment program.
Creative Biomart
