Literature DB >> 26919989

[Innovations in cardiology. We are too fast with new methods].

A Diegeler1.   

Abstract

Cardiology is rapidly developing on many levels. New treatment methods are introduced at ever decreasing intervals. Against the background of economization of other areas in medicine, dangers are lurking here for patients if safety, usefulness and sustainability of the treatment methods cannot be sufficiently proven. The German Federal Ministry of Health (Bundesministerium für Gesundheit, BMG) aims to adjust the regulatory framework for the approval of new medical products to the legal requirements of the European Union. With the establishment of the Institute for Quality Assessment and Transparency in Health Care (Institut für Qualitätssicherung und Transparenz im Gesundheitswesen, IQTIG) more precise quality controls should be carried out. Implantation registers will be soon implemented and the routinely performed quality control of different interventions will be coordinated across different healthcare sectors in order to achieve a better understanding of long-term results. Medicine in general and the safety of patients in particular, ultimately benefit from more stringent controls, neutrality and transparency in the assessment of new methods.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cardiology; Innovation; Medical Devices Act; New technologies; Quality assessment

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26919989     DOI: 10.1007/s00059-016-4411-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Herz        ISSN: 0340-9937            Impact factor:   1.443


  5 in total

1.  12-month blood pressure results of catheter-based renal artery denervation for resistant hypertension: the SYMPLICITY HTN-3 trial.

Authors:  George L Bakris; Raymond R Townsend; John M Flack; Sandeep Brar; Sidney A Cohen; Ralph D'Agostino; David E Kandzari; Barry T Katzen; Martin B Leon; Laura Mauri; Manuela Negoita; William W O'Neill; Suzanne Oparil; Krishna Rocha-Singh; Deepak L Bhatt
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2015-04-07       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 2.  Meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing carotid endarterectomy and endovascular treatment.

Authors:  T Luebke; M Aleksic; J Brunkwall
Journal:  Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg       Date:  2007-08-01       Impact factor: 7.069

3.  Stent design lowers angiographic but not clinical adverse events in stenting of symptomatic intracranial stenosis - results of a single center study with 100 consecutive patients.

Authors:  S Rohde; J Seckinger; S Hähnel; P A Ringleb; M Bendszus; M Hartmann
Journal:  Int J Stroke       Date:  2012-02-01       Impact factor: 5.266

4.  Effect of a balloon-expandable intracranial stent vs medical therapy on risk of stroke in patients with symptomatic intracranial stenosis: the VISSIT randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Osama O Zaidat; Brian-Fred Fitzsimmons; Britton Keith Woodward; Zhigang Wang; Monika Killer-Oberpfalzer; Ajay Wakhloo; Rishi Gupta; Howard Kirshner; J Thomas Megerian; James Lesko; Pamela Pitzer; Jandira Ramos; Alicia C Castonguay; Stanley Barnwell; Wade S Smith; Daryl R Gress
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015 Mar 24-31       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Frequency, Risk Factors, and Outcome of Coexistent Small Vessel Disease and Intracranial Arterial Stenosis: Results From the Stenting and Aggressive Medical Management for Preventing Recurrent Stroke in Intracranial Stenosis (SAMMPRIS) Trial.

Authors:  Hyung-Min Kwon; Michael J Lynn; Tanya N Turan; Colin P Derdeyn; David Fiorella; Bethany F Lane; Jean Montgomery; L Scott Janis; Zoran Rumboldt; Marc I Chimowitz
Journal:  JAMA Neurol       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 18.302

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.