CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

推荐文献

Abstract

Recommended Article

The HACD4 haplotype as a risk factor for atherosclerosis in males Coronary Catheterization and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in China: 10-Year Results From the China PEACE-Retrospective CathPCI Study CSC Expert Consensus on Principles of Clinical Management of Patients with Severe Emergent Cardiovascular Diseases during the COVID-19 Epidemic 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American College of Physicians, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons How Low to Go With Glucose, Cholesterol, and Blood Pressure in Primary Prevention of CVD SCAI Expert Consensus Statement Update on Best Practices for Transradial Angiography and Intervention Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds Versus Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stents LOX-1 in Atherosclerosis and Myocardial Ischemia: Biology, Genetics, and Modulation

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.