Coronary stenting versus balloon angioplasty in small vessels
A meta-analysis from 11 randomized studies
Raúl Moreno, MD, FESC*,*,
Cristina Fernández, MD, PhD*,
Fernando Alfonso, PhD, MD, FESC*,
Rosana Hernández, MD, PhD, FESC*,
Maria J. Pérez-Vizcayno, MD*,
Javier Escaned, MD, PhD, FESC*,
Manel Sabaté, MD, PhD, FESC*,
Camino Bañuelos, MD, FESC*,
Dominick J. Angiolillo, MD, FESC*,
Luis Azcona, MD* and
Carlos Macaya, MD, PhD, FESC*
* Division of Interventional Cardiology, Instituto Cardiovascular, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain
View larger version (22K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1 Effect of coronary stenting (CS) on restenosis rate at six months for each study and in the pooled population, showing risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence intervals (CI). See Abbreviation Box for trial acronym definitions.
|
|
View larger version (18K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2 Association between reference vessel diameter (RVD) and risk ratio (RR) for restenosis in each study (lineal regression). See Abbreviation Box for trial acronym definitions.
|
|
View larger version (20K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3 Effect of coronary stenting (CS) on the rate of cardiac events at six months for each study and in the pooled population, showing risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence intervals (CI). See Abbreviation Box for trial acronym definitions.
|
|
View larger version (21K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4 Effect of coronary stenting (CS) on the rate of new revascularization procedures at six months for each study and in the pooled population, showing risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence intervals (CI). See Abbreviation Box for trial acronym definitions.
|
|
|
