Response by Ortega-Paz et al to Letter Regarding Article, “Magnesium-Based Resorbable Scaffold Versus Permanent Metallic Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: The MAGSTEMI Randomized Clinical Trial”
- 14 April 2020
- journal article
- letter
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Circulation
- Vol. 141 (15), E748-E749
- https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.120.045964
Abstract
No abstract availableThis publication has 5 references indexed in Scilit:
- Target lesion revascularisation of bioresorbable metal scaffolds: a case series study and literature reviewEuroIntervention, 2021
- Magnesium-Based Resorbable Scaffold Versus Permanent Metallic Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial InfarctionCirculation, 2019
- Long-Term Coronary Functional Assessment of the Infarct-Related Artery Treated With Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds or Everolimus-Eluting Metallic StentsJACC: Cardiovascular Interventions, 2018
- Comparison of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent for the treatment of coronary artery stenosis (ABSORB II): a 3 year, randomised, controlled, single-blind, multicentre clinical trialThe Lancet, 2016
- Prognostic Impact of Coronary Vasodilator Dysfunction on Adverse Long-Term Outcome of Coronary Heart DiseaseCirculation, 2000