Clinical Outcomes of XXXX With @entity63 who Undergo Routine Coronary Angiography and Subsequent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

@entity1 @entity66 @entity6 @entity63 @entity583 @entity75 @entity453 @entity65
BACKGROUND: @entity63 ( @entity63 ) is associated with a high risk of @entity65 events. We assessed the strategy of routine coronary angiography and subsequent coronary revascularization, if clinically indicated, in @entity1 with @entity63 who underwent percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA). METHODS: Of a total 286 consecutive @entity63 @entity1 treated by PTA, 252 @entity1 who underwent coronary angiography before or after PTA were enrolled. @entity453 ( @entity453 ) was defined as angiographic stenosis >= 50% and significant @entity453 as >= 70% stenosis. RESULTS: Of the 252 @entity1 with @entity63 who underwent coronary angiography, a total of 167 @entity1 (66.3%) had @entity453 and 85 @entity1 (33.7%) did not have @entity453 . @entity1 in the @entity453 group were older, had a higher prevalence of @entity6 and @entity66 , and had a lower mean ejection fraction. In the @entity453 group, of the 145 @entity1 with significant @entity453 , percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was performed in 114 @entity1 (78.6%). At 1 year, the @entity453 and non- @entity453 groups had no statistically significant differences in mortality (7.1% vs 4.7%; P=.45), @entity583 (1.1% vs 0%; P=.31), and PCI (4.7% vs 1.1%; P=.31). These outcomes were similar after the adjustment of baseline confounders. At 1 year, the @entity453 and non- @entity453 groups had similar rates of repeat PTA (16.7% vs 17.6%; P=.86), @entity75 revascularization (13.7% vs 14.1%; P=.94), and amputation (19.1% vs 16.4%; P=.60). CONCLUSION: A strategy of routine coronary angiography and coronary revascularization may be a reasonable treatment option for these @entity1 who have high risk for severe @entity453 . A randomized trial is needed to determine if this is the preferred strategy for @entity63 @entity1 .
