Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Differences in outcome between percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary bypass grafting

  • Editor’s Commentary
  • Published:
Current Cardiology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References and Recommended Reading

  1. Rodriguez A, Bernardi V, Navia J, et al.: Argentine randomized study: coronary angioplasty with stenting versus coronary bypass surgery in patients with multiple-vessel disease (ERACI II). 30 day and one-year follow-up results. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001, 37:51–58.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Puel J, Karouny E, Marco F, et al.: Angioplasty versus surgery in multi-vessel disease: immediate results and in-hospital outcome in a randomized prospective study [abstract]. Circulation 1992, 86(Suppl I):372.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Rodriguez A, Boullon F, Perez-Balino, et al.: Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI): in hospital results and 1 year follow-up. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993, 22:1060–1067.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. RITA Trial Participants: Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial. Lancet 1993, 341:573–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hamm CW, Reimers J, Ischinger T, et al.: A randomized study of coronary angioplasty compared with bypass surgery in patients with symptomatic multivessel coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 1994, 331:1037–1043.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. King SB III, Lembo NJ, Weintraub WS, et al.: A randomized trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 1994, 331:1044–1050.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. CABRI Trial Participants: Coronary Angioplasty vs. Bypass Revascularization Investigation (CABRI) results during the first year. Lancet 1995, 346:1179–1183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Investigators: Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with angioplasty in patients with multivessel disease. N Engl J Med 1996, 335:217–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ryan TJ: Present-day PTCR versus CABG: a randomized comparison with a different focus and a new result. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001, 37:59–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Boden W, O’Rourke R, Crawford M, et al.: Outcomes in patients with acute non-Q-wave myocardial infarction randomly assigned to an "invasive" as compared with a conservative management strategy. N Engl J Med 1998, 338:1785–1792.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. The Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) Study Investigators: Effects of an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 2000, 342:821–828.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine, University of Arizona Health Sciences Center, 1501 North Campbell Avenue, 85724-6102, Tucson, AZ, USA

    Joseph S. Alpert MD

Authors
  1. Joseph S. Alpert MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Alpert, J.S. Differences in outcome between percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary bypass grafting. Curr Cardiol Rep 3, 173–174 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-001-0017-x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-001-0017-x

Search

Navigation