CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

推荐文献

科研文章

荐读文献

A Test in Context: E/A and E/e' to Assess Diastolic Dysfunction and LV Filling Pressure Geometry as a Confounder When Assessing Ventricular Systolic Function: Comparison Between Ejection Fraction and Strain Long-Term Outcomes in Women and Men Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Basic Biology of Oxidative Stress and the Cardiovascular System: Part 1 of a 3-Part Series A Combination of Allogeneic Stem Cells Promotes Cardiac Regeneration Heart Failure With Preserved, Borderline, and Reduced Ejection Fraction: 5-Year Outcomes Pulmonary Artery Pressure-Guided Management of Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction Association Between Living in Food Deserts and Cardiovascular Risk 2016 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure Burden of 30-Day Readmissions After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in 833,344 Patients in the United States: Predictors, Causes, and Cost
|<<... 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ...>>|

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.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 注册

> CBS 2019 会议日程

> CBS 2019 学术征集

> CBS 2019 热点

 CBSMD

> CBSMD 网站注册

> 教育中心

> 荐读文献

> Top 10 阅读文献

> 文献导读
CBS 2019 CBS 2019 主席团 教育中心 科研动态
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top