|
|
||||||||||
|
J Am Coll Cardiol, 2005; 46:1677-1683, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2005.06.073
(Published online 7 October 2005). © 2005 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||



* Section of Interventional Cardiology-Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts USA
Sarasota Memorial Hospital, Sarasota, Florida USA
Krannert Institute of Cardiology, Indiana University of Medicine, Indianapolis, Indiana USA
Morton Plant Hospital, Clearwater Cardiovascular & Interventional Consultants, Clearwater, Florida USA
|| Montgomery Village, Maryland USA
¶ Wellmont Holston Valley Medical Center, Kingsport, Tennessee USA
Manuscript received February 28, 2005; revised manuscript received June 17, 2005, accepted June 21, 2005.
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Joseph P. Carrozza, Jr., Section of Interventional Cardiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02215 (Email: jcarrozz{at}bidmc.harvard.edu).
OBJECTIVES: The Protection During Saphenous Vein Graft Intervention to Prevent Distal Embolization (PRIDE) study compared outcomes with the TriActiv System (Kensey Nash Corp., Exton, Pennsylvania), a balloon-protection flush and extraction device, with an embolic protection group during treatment of saphenous venous grafts (SVGs).
BACKGROUND: Treatment of SVGs with embolic protection reduces adverse cardiac events.
METHODS: We conducted a prospective trial randomizing 631 patients with coronary ischemia and lesions in SVGs to embolic protection with the TriActiv System or control group (Guardwire System [Medtronic AVE, Santa Rosa, California] or Filterwire EX [Boston Scientific Corp., Maple Grove, Minnesota]).
RESULTS: The incidence of major adverse cardiac events at 30 days was 11.2% for the TriActiv group and 10.1% for the control group (relative risk = 1.1%; 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 1.76; p = 0.65; p = 0.02 for non-inferiority). Safety and efficacy end points were similar between groups except that patients randomized to the TriActiv System had more hemorrhagic complications (10.9% vs. 5.4%; p = 0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: The TriActiv System was not inferior to approved embolic protection devices for the treatment of diseased SVGs.
| ||||||||||||
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. R. Bates Aspirating and Filtering Atherothrombotic Debris During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv., June 1, 2008; 1(3): 265 - 267. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. J. Kirtane, E. R. Heyman, C. Metzger, J. A. Breall, and J. P. Carrozza Jr Correlates of Adverse Events During Saphenous Vein Graft Intervention With Distal Embolic Protection: A PRIDE Substudy J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv., April 1, 2008; 1(2): 186 - 191. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Coolong, D. S. Baim, R. E. Kuntz, A. J. O'Malley, S. Marulkar, D. E. Cutlip, J. J. Popma, and L. Mauri Saphenous Vein Graft Stenting and Major Adverse Cardiac Events: A Predictive Model Derived From a Pooled Analysis of 3958 Patients Circulation, February 12, 2008; 117(6): 790 - 797. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Mauri, D. Cox, J. Hermiller, J. Massaro, J. Wahr, S. W. Tay, M. Jonas, J. J. Popma, J. Pavliska, D. Wahr, et al. The PROXIMAL Trial: Proximal Protection During Saphenous Vein Graft Intervention Using the Proxis Embolic Protection System: A Randomized, Prospective, Multicenter Clinical Trial J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., October 9, 2007; 50(15): 1442 - 1449. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Mauri, C. Rogers, and D. S. Baim Devices for Distal Protection During Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization Circulation, June 6, 2006; 113(22): 2651 - 2656. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. R. Dixon, C. L. Grines, and W. W. O'Neill The Year in Interventional Cardiology J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., April 18, 2006; 47(8): 1689 - 1706. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| HOME | SUBSCRIPTIONS | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | CARDIOSOURCE | SEARCH | HELP | FEEDBACK |