Yazar "Kalay, Nihat" seçeneğine göre listele

Listeleniyor 1 - 4 / 4
  • Küçük Resim Yok
    Öğe
    Clinical outcome of B2/C type isolated proximal LAD disease treated with drug-eluting stents
    (Aves Yayincilik, 2011) Cicek, Davran; Pekdemir, Hasan; Kalay, Nihat; Muderrisoglu, Haldun
    [Abstract Not Available]
  • Küçük Resim Yok
    Öğe
    Efficacy of Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Compared With Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in an Unselected Population With Coronary Artery Disease: 24-Month Outcomes of Patients in a Prospective Non-randomized Registry in Southern Turkey
    (Ivyspring Int Publ, 2010) Cicek, Davran; Pekdemir, Hasan; Kalay, Nihat; Binici, Sueleyman; Altay, Hakan; Muderrisoglu, Haldun
    Background: The efficacy of drug-eluting stents has been shown in randomized trials, but some controversy exists regarding which stent sirolimus-eluting or paclitaxel-eluting is more effective in unselected Turkish patients. Therefore, we investigated the clinical outcomes of patients who were treated with one type of these drug-eluting stents in the real world. Methods: We created a registry and prospectively analyzed data on a consecutive series of all patients who presented to our institution with symptomatic coronary artery disease between February 2005 and March 2007 and who were treated with the sirolimus- or the paclitaxel-eluting stent. The follow-up period after stent implantation was approximately 24 months. The primary end point was a major cardiac event, and the secondary end point was stent thrombosis. Informed consent was obtained from all subjects, and the study protocol was approved by the local ethical committee. Results: In total, 204 patients were treated with either the sirolimus-eluting stent (n = 103) or the paclitaxel-eluting stent (n = 101). The lesions in the 2 arms of the study were treated similarly by conventional technique. At 24-month follow-up, patients who received the paclitaxel-eluting stent showed significantly higher rates of non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (1.9% vs 5.9%; P: .002), target vessel revascularization (1.9% vs 4.9%; P: .002), coronary artery bypass graft surgery (1.9% vs 6.9%; P: .001), and late stent thrombosis (1.9% vs 3.9%, P: .002). Conclusions: Patients who received the sirolimus- eluting stent showed better clinical outcomes compared with those who had the paclitaxel-eluting-stent.
  • Küçük Resim Yok
    Öğe
    TWO-YEAR OUTCOME OF TURKISH PATIENTS TREATED WITH ZOTAROLIMUS VERSUS PACLITAXEL ELUTING STENTS IN AN UNSELECTED POPULATION WITH CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE
    (Karger, 2010) Cicek, Davran; Pekdemir, Hasan; Kalay, Nihat; Binici, Suleyman; Altay, Hakan; Muderrisoglu, Haldun
    [Abstract Not Available]
  • Küçük Resim Yok
    Öğe
    Two-year Outcome of Turkish Patients Treated with Zotarolimus Versus Paclitaxel Eluting Stents in an Unselected Population with Coronary Artery Disease in the Real World: A Prospective Non-randomized Registry in Southern Turkey
    (Ivyspring Int Publ, 2011) Cicek, Davran; Pekdemir, Hasan; Haberal, Cevahir; Kalay, Nihat; Binici, Suleyman; Altay, Hakan; Muderrisoglu, Haldun
    Background: Our purpose was to investigate the clinical outcomes of Zotarolimus- and Paclitaxel-eluting stents in Turkish patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). In general, the outcome of drug-eluting stent (DES) placement has a proven efficacy in randomized trials. However, the difference in efficacy between the Zotarolimus and Paclitaxel-eluting stents in unselected Turkish patients is controversial. Therefore, we investigated the clinical outcomes of these two drug-eluting stents in the real-world. Methods: We created a registry and prospectively analyzed data on a consecutive series of all patients who presented to our institution with symptomatic coronary artery disease between February 2005 and March 2007 and who were treated with the zotarolimus- or the paclitaxel-eluting stent. The follow-up period was approximately two years. The primary end-point was major cardiac events, and the secondary end-point was definite stent thrombosis. Informed consent was obtained from all subjects, and the study protocol was approved by the local ethical committee. Results: In total, 217 patients were treated with either the zotarolimus-eluting stent (n = 116) or the paclitaxel-eluting stent (n = 101). The lesions in the 2 arms of the study were treated similarly by conventional technique. At 24-month follow-up the paclitaxel-eluting stent group showed significantly higher non-Q wave myocardial infarction (2.6% vs 5.9%, p: 0.02), Q wave myocardial infarction (1.7% vs 5.9%, p: 0.049), coronary artery binding graft surgery (2.6% vs 6.9%, p: 0.002), and late stent thrombosis (1.7% vs 3.9%, p: 0.046). Conclusions: Zotarolimus-eluting stents demonstrated better clinical outcomes than Paclitaxel- eluting stents in a daily routine practice of coronary intervention in an unselected Turkish population.