CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Other Relevant Articles

Abstract

Recommended Article

LOX-1 in Atherosclerosis and Myocardial Ischemia: Biology, Genetics, and Modulation Advances in Coronary No-Reflow Phenomenon-a Contemporary Review Cardiovascular Risk Reduction with Icosapent Ethyl for Hypertriglyceridemia Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Out-of-Hospital Refractory Ventricular Fibrillation Cardiac Arrest Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Evidence and Controversies Comparison of Stenting Versus Bypass Surgery According to the Completeness of Revascularization in Severe Coronary Artery Disease: Patient-Level Pooled Analysis of the SYNTAX, PRECOMBAT, and BEST Trials Incidence, Determinants, and Outcomes of Left and Right Radial Access Use in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United Kingdom-A National Perspective Using the BCIS Dataset Comparison of Benefit of Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion in Patients With Versus Without Reduced (≤40%) Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction

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.