Douglass A Morrison
- What is the evidence for percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft in ischemic cardiomyopathy?Douglass A Morrison
University of Arizona, AZ, USA
Am Heart Hosp J 3:175-81. 2005..The conclusion of this review is that a trial of medical therapy vs. percutaneous coronary intervention could be of additional value, especially for patients at particularly high risk, when undergoing CABG...
- Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention: a new paradigm for a new centuryD A Morrison
Cardiology Section 111 C, Southern Arizona Veterans Affairs, Healthcare System, Tucson, AZ 85723, USA
Minerva Cardioangiol 53:361-77. 2005..Old age and severely reduced left ventricular function are associated with higher risks, with either CABG or PCI. Small caliber and diffusely diseased vessels may imply lower expectation of success, by either CABG or PCI...
- Balancing benefit against risk in the choice of therapy for coronary artery disease. Lesson from prospective, randomized, clinical trials of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgeryD A Morrison
outhern Arizona Veterans Affairs, Health Care System SAVAHCS, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85723, USA
Minerva Cardioangiol 51:585-97. 2003..PCI is the acute stabilization method of choice for patients with on-going ischemia and acute MI, especially among patients with hemodynamic compromise, and/or major comorbidity...
- Percutaneous coronary intervention of or through saphenous vein grafts or internal mammary arteries: the impact of stents, adjunctive pharmacology, and multicomponent distal protectionDouglass A Morrison
Section of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, SAVAHCS, and the University of Arizona, Sarver Heart Center, Tucson, 85723, USA
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 67:571-9. 2006..5 years), with 91% survival and one late CABG in the IMA group. SVG PCI with stents and adjunctive pharmacotherapies is associated with relatively low rates of procedural MI and favorable long-term outcomes...
- Percutaneous coronary intervention versus repeat bypass surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia: AWESOME randomized trial and registry experience with post-CABG patientsDouglass A Morrison
Tucson VA Medical Center and the University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85723, USA
J Am Coll Cardiol 40:1951-4. 2002....
- Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass graft surgery for diabetic patients with unstable angina and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: outcome of diabetic patients in the AWESOME randomized trial and registrySteven P Sedlis
Section of Cardiology, 12W, New York VA Medical Center, 423 East 23rd Street, New York, NY 10010, USA
J Am Coll Cardiol 40:1555-66. 2002....
- Impact of stents and abciximab on survival from cardiogenic shock treated with percutaneous coronary interventionRaymond Huang
Cardiovascular Disease Sections, Southern Arizona Veterans Affairs Healthcare System and University of Arizona Sarver Heart Center, 3601 S Sixth Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85723, USA
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 65:25-33. 2005..007). Stents and abciximab have been associated with improved acute angiographic and procedural success of PCI for cardiogenic shock, leading to improved survival...
- Health-related quality of life after percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass surgery in high-risk patients with medically refractory ischemiaJohn S Rumsfeld
Cardiology and Health Services Research, Denver Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 1055 Clermont Street, Denver, CO 80220, USA
J Am Coll Cardiol 41:1732-8. 2003..We compared six-month health-related quality of life (HRQL) for high-risk patients with medically refractory ischemia randomized to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery...
- Outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass grafting for patients with low left ventricular ejection fractions, unstable angina pectoris, and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass (the AWESOME Randomized Trial and RegistrySteven P Sedlis
New York VA Medical Center and New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York 10010, USA
Am J Cardiol 94:118-20. 2004..This study reports the outcome of patients with LV ejection fraction <35% in the randomized clinical trial and the physician-directed and patient choice registries of the AWESOME study...
- Cost-effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafts versus percutaneous coronary intervention for revascularization of high-risk patientsKevin T Stroupe
Cooperative Studies Program Coordinating Center, Hines VA Hospital, PO Box 5000 151H, Hines, IL 60141, USA
Circulation 114:1251-7. 2006..The present study examined the cost-effectiveness of PCI versus CABG for these high-risk patients...
- Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass graft surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: The VA AWESOME multicenter registry: comparison with the randomized cliniDouglass A Morrison
Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory, Tucson VA Medical Center, Tucson, Arizona 85723, USA
J Am Coll Cardiol 39:266-73. 2002....
- Cardiac revascularization of the medically refractory elderly patient: it is TIME to pay the piperDouglass A Morrison
Eur Heart J 25:2180-2. 2004
- Percutaneous intervention versus coronary bypass surgery for patients older than 70 years of age with high-risk unstable anginaKodangudi B Ramanathan
Veterans Administration Medical Center, Memphis, Tennessee, USA
Ann Thorac Surg 80:1340-6. 2005..Both the randomized trial and the registry demonstrated comparable 3-year survival. The purpose of this study was to compare bypass and percutaneous intervention survival of AWESOME patients who were older than 70 years of age...
- Counterintuitive contributions to the care of myocardial infarction and the need for randomized trialsDouglass A Morrison
J Am Coll Cardiol 42:978-80. 2003
- Images in cardiology: a coronary-left ventricular fistula associated with myocardial ischemiaMing He Huang
Department of Medicine, University of Arizona Sarver Heart Center and Tucson VA Medical Center, USA
Clin Cardiol 25:441. 2002
- The current status and future direction of percutaneous coronary intervention without on-site surgical backup: an expert consensus document from the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and InterventionsGregory J Dehmer
Cardiology Division, Texas A and M School of Medicine, Scott and White Clinic, 2401 South 31st Street, Temple, TX 76508, USA
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 69:471-8. 2007
- 2007 Focused Update of the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 Guideline Update for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines: 2007 Writing Group to Review New Evidence anSpencer B King
Circulation 117:261-95. 2008
- 2007 focused update of the ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice guidelinesSpencer B King
J Am Coll Cardiol 51:172-209. 2008