CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

推荐文献

科研文章

荐读文献

Appropriate Use Criteria and Health Status Outcomes Following Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the OPEN-CTO Registry Guidelines in review: Comparison of the 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes and the 2015 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation Frequency, Regional Variation, and Predictors of Undetermined Cause of Death in Cardiometabolic Clinical Trials: A Pooled Analysis of 9259 Deaths in 9 Trials Variation in Revascularization Practice and Outcomes in Asymptomatic Stable Ischemic Heart Disease 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines Coronary Artery Calcium Progression Is Associated With Coronary Plaque Volume Progression - Results From a Quantitative Semiautomated Coronary Artery Plaque Analysis The year in cardiovascular medicine 2020: interventional cardiology Mortality 10 Years After Percutaneous or Surgical Revascularization in Patients With Total Coronary Artery Occlusions Sudden Cardiac Arrest Survivorship: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association Guiding Principles for Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Review ArticleVolume 74, Issue 25, December 2019

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Limitations of Repeat Revascularization as an Outcome Measure

P Lamelas, J Belardi, R Whitlock et al. Keywords: CABG; coronary artery disease; PCI; revascularization

ABSTRACT

Repeat revascularization is a commonly used outcome measure in trials comparing percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery, and differences in this outcome often drive the relative risk for the primary endpoint. However, repeat revascularization as an outcome measure has important limitations that complicates its meaningful interpretation, including confounding by indication (driven by varying use of stress testing and thresholds for invasive angiography), differential likelihood of revascularization after graft versus stent failure, uncertainty of the prognostic impact of repeat revascularization, and patient preferences and appraisal of the import of repeat revascularization. Knowledge of these issues will result in better appreciation of the utility of repeat revascularization as a clinically meaningful outcome measure. The authors describe these issues and provide recommendations for the use and assessment of repeat revascularization as an endpoint when comparing different revascularization modalities.