Department of Error (DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)60319-6);Percutaneous coronary interventions for non-acute coronary artery disease: a quantitative 20-year synopsis and a network meta-analysis

The Lancet

Volumn 373, Issue 9667, 2009, Pages 911-918

  Trikalinos, Thomas A ^a   Alsheikh Ali, Alawi A ^a   Tatsioni, Athina ^a   Nallamothu, Brahmajee K ^b   Kent, David M ^a  

^a TUFTS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BARE METAL STENT; CLINICAL TRIAL; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; DRUG ELUTING STENT; HEART DEATH; HEART INFARCTION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERCUTANEOUS TRANSLUMINAL ANGIOPLASTY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVASCULARIZATION; RISK FACTOR; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; THERAPY EFFECT;

EID: 61849137328     PISSN: 01406736     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61412-4     Document Type: Erratum

References (36)

1. Rosamond W., Flegal K., Furie K., et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2008 update: a report from the American Heart Association Statistics Committee and Stroke Statistics Subcommittee. Circulation 117 (2008) e25-e146
2. Keeley E.C., Boura J.A., and Grines C.L. Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials. Lancet 361 (2003) 13-20
3. Mehta S.R., Cannon C.P., Fox K.A., et al. Routine vs selective invasive strategies in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a collaborative meta-analysis of randomized trials. JAMA 293 (2005) 2908-2917
4. Bucher H.C., Hengstler P., Schindler C., and Guyatt G.H. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus medical treatment for non-acute coronary heart disease: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 321 (2000) 73-77
5. Brophy J.M., Belisle P., and Joseph L. Evidence for use of coronary stents. A hierarchical bayesian meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 138 (2003) 777-786
6. Babapulle M.N., Joseph L., Bélisle P., Brophy J.M., and Eisenberg M.J. A hierarchical Bayesian meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials of drug-eluting stents. Lancet 364 (2004) 583-591
7. Katritsis D.G., Karvouni E., and Ioannidis J.P. Meta-analysis comparing drug-eluting stents with bare metal stents. Am J Cardiol 95 (2005) 640-643
8. Grines C.L. Off-label use of drug-eluting stents putting it in perspective. J Am Coll Cardiol 51 (2008) 615-617
9. Lu G., and Ades A.E. Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med 23 (2004) 3105-3124
10. Lumley T. Network meta-analysis for indirect treatment comparisons. Stat Med 21 (2002) 2313-2324
11. Robinson K.A., and Dickersin K. Development of a highly sensitive search strategy for the retrieval of reports of controlled trials using PubMed. Int J Epidemiol 31 (2002) 150-153
12. Ioannidis J.P., and Katritsis D.G. Percutaneous coronary intervention for late reperfusion after myocardial infarction in stable patients. Am Heart J 154 (2007) 1065-1071
13. Stettler C., Wandel S., Allemann S., et al. Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis. Lancet 370 (2007) 937-948
14. DerSimonian R., and Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 7 (1986) 177-188
15. Higgins J.P., and Thompson S.G. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 21 (2002) 1539-1558
16. Bucher H.C., Guyatt G.H., Griffith L.E., and Walter S.D. The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol 50 (1997) 683-691
17. Glenny A.M., Altman D.G., Song F., et al. Indirect comparisons of competing interventions. Health Technol Assess 9 (2005) 1-152
18. Folland E.D., Hartigan P.M., and Parisi A.F. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus medical therapy for stable angina pectoris: outcomes for patients with double-vessel versus single-vessel coronary artery disease in a Veterans Affairs Cooperative randomized trial. Veterans Affairs ACME InvestigatorS. J Am Coll Cardiol 29 (1997) 1505-1511
19. Colombo A., Drzewiecki J., Banning A., et al. Randomized study to assess the effectiveness of slow- and moderate-release polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents for coronary artery lesions. Circulation 108 (2003) 788-794
20. Gibbons R.J., Abrams J., Chatterjee K., et al. ACC/AHA 2002 guideline update for the management of patients with chronic stable angina-summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients With Chronic Stable Angina). J Am Coll Cardiol 41 (2003) 159-168
21. Katritsis D.G., and Ioannidis J.P. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus conservative therapy in nonacute coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. Circulation 111 (2005) 2906-2912
22. Boden W.E., O'Rourke R.A., Teo K.K., et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 356 (2007) 1503-1516
23. Kent D.M., and Trikalinos T.A. Are "treatment" bare metal stents superior to "control" bare metal stents? A meta-analytic approach. Am Heart J 155 (2008) 624-629
24. Tung R., Kaul S., Diamond G.A., and Shah P.K. Narrative review: drug-eluting stents for the management of restenosis: a critical appraisal of the evidence. Ann Intern Med 144 (2006) 913-919
25. Serruys P.W., van Hout B., Bonnier H., et al. Randomised comparison of implantation of heparin-coated stents with balloon angioplasty in selected patients with coronary artery disease (Benestent II). Lancet 352 (1998) 673-681
26. Holmes D.R., Gersh B.J., Whitlow P., King S.B., and Dove J.T. Percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic stable angina: a reassessment. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 1 (2008) 34-43
27. Naghavi M., Libby P., Falk E., et al. From vulnerable plaque to vulnerable patient: a call for new definitions and risk assessment strategies: Part I. Circulation 108 (2003) 1664-1672
28. Schomig A., Mehilli J., de Waha A., Seyfarth M., Pache J., and Kastrati A. A meta-analysis of 17 randomized trials of a percutaneous coronary intervention-based strategy in patients with stable coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 52 (2008) 894-904
29. Soares P.R., Hueb W.A., Lemos P.A., et al. Coronary revascularization (surgical or percutaneous) decreases mortality after the first year in diabetic subjects but not in nondiabetic subjects with multivessel disease: an analysis from the Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS II). Circulation 114 (2006) I420-I424
30. Hueb W., Lopes N.H., Gersh B.J., et al. Five-year follow-up of the Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS II): a randomized controlled clinical trial of 3 therapeutic strategies for multivessel coronary artery disease. Circulation 115 (2007) 1082-1089
31. Antman E.M., Cohen M., Bernink P.J., et al. The TIMI risk score for unstable angina/non-ST elevation MI: a method for prognostication and therapeutic decision making. JAMA 284 (2000) 835-842
32. Baker S.G., and Kramer B.S. The transitive fallacy for randomized trials: if A bests B and B bests C in separate trials, is A better than C?. BMC Med Res Methodol 2 (2002) 13
33. Song F., Altman D.G., Glenny A.M., and Deeks J.J. Validity of indirect comparison for estimating efficacy of competing interventions: empirical evidence from published meta-analyses. BMJ 326 (2003) 472
34. Song F., Harvey I., and Lilford R. Adjusted indirect comparison may be less biased than direct comparison for evaluating new pharmaceutical interventions. J Clin Epidemiol 61 (2008) 455-463
35. Ernst E., and Pittler M.H. Efficacy or effectiveness?. J Intern Med 260 (2006) 488-490
36. Prochaska J.O., Evers K.E., Prochaska J.M., Van Marter D., and Johnson J.L. Efficacy and effectiveness trials: examples from smoking cessation and bullying prevention. J Health Psychol 12 (2007) 170-178