0000000000630618

AUTHOR

Bernhard Reimers

0000-0002-9890-5582

showing 3 related works from this author

Second asymptomatic carotid surgery trial (ACST-2): a randomised comparison of carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy.

2021

Summary Background Among asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis but no recent stroke or transient cerebral ischaemia, either carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can restore patency and reduce long-term stroke risks. However, from recent national registry data, each option causes about 1% procedural risk of disabling stroke or death. Comparison of their long-term protective effects requires large-scale randomised evidence. Methods ACST-2 is an international multicentre randomised trial of CAS versus CEA among asymptomatic patients with severe stenosis thought to require intervention, interpreted with all other relevant trials. Patients were eligib…

Malemedicine.medical_specialtyTime FactorsTime Factormedicine.medical_treatmentCarotid StenosiMEDLINECarotid endarterectomyRate ratioRisk AssessmentAsymptomaticlaw.inventionRandomized controlled triallawRisk Factorscarotid artery stenting (CAS); carotid endarterectomy (CEA)StentmedicineHumansCarotid StenosisStrokeEndarterectomyAgedEndarterectomy Carotidbusiness.industrycarotid arteryRisk FactorArticlesGeneral Medicinetrialmedicine.diseaseSettore MED/22 - CHIRURGIA VASCOLARESurgeryStrokeStenosisTreatment Outcomecarotid artery stenting (CAS)Settore MED/11 - MALATTIE DELL'APPARATO CARDIOVASCOLAREFemaleStentsHuman medicinemedicine.symptomcarotid endarterectomy (CEA)businessHumanLancet (London, England)
researchProduct

Chronic total coronary occlusions and the Occluded Artery Trial. A critical appraisal.

2008

The OAT trial and its angiographic substudy TOSCA-2, along with a number of published commentaries, represents examples of over-interpretation of clinical study results. A study that achieved no statistically significant result for any of the study endpoints can only claim to have proven that their null hypothesis cannot be rejected. The lack of power due to a reduction of patient numbers by one third, and an unexpected low event rate, makes it not unlikely that another trial would be able to disprove the null hypothesis. These statistical facts should be accepted by the authors and commentators. Instead, the inconclusive results were interpreted in such a way that they might apply to patie…

medicine.medical_specialtybusiness.industryMyocardial Infarctionocclusions.Critical appraisalmedicine.anatomical_structureCoronary OcclusionInternal medicinemedicineCardiologyHumansChronicCardiology and Cardiovascular MedicinebusinesscoronaryRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicArteryEuroIntervention
researchProduct

A Multicenter, Phase 2, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Parallel-Group, Dose-Finding Trial of the Oral Factor XIa Inhibitor Asundexian …

2022

Background: Oral activated factor XI (FXIa) inhibitors may modulate coagulation to prevent thromboembolic events without substantially increasing bleeding. We explored the pharmacodynamics, safety, and efficacy of the oral FXIa inhibitor asundexian for secondary prevention after acute myocardial infarction (MI). Methods: We randomized 1601 patients with recent acute MI to oral asundexian 10, 20, or 50 mg or placebo once daily for 6 to 12 months in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2, dose-ranging trial. Patients were randomized within 5 days of their qualifying MI and received dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor. The effect of asundexian on FXIa inhibition…

MaleTicagrelorAspirinMyocardial InfarctionAnticoagulantsHemorrhageFactor XIaPercutaneous Coronary InterventionTreatment OutcomeDouble-Blind MethodPhysiology (medical)HumansFemale03.02. Klinikai orvostanAcute Coronary SyndromeCardiology and Cardiovascular MedicinePrasugrel HydrochloridePlatelet Aggregation InhibitorsAgedCirculation
researchProduct