CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

光学相关断层扫描

Abstract

Recommended Article

Optical coherence tomography and C-reactive protein in risk stratification of acute coronary syndromes Angiography Alone Versus Angiography Plus Optical Coherence Tomography to Guide Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Outcomes From the Pan-London PCI Cohort Assessment of the coronary calcification by optical coherence tomography Histopathological validation of optical coherence tomography findings of the coronary arteries Uncovered Culprit Plaque Ruptures in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Assessed by Optical Coherence Tomography and Intravascular Ultrasound With iMap Consensus standards for acquisition, measurement, and reporting of intravascular optical coherence tomography studies: a report from the International Working Group for Intravascular Optical Coherence Tomography Standardization and Validation Comparison of Coronary Intimal Plaques by Optical Coherence Tomography in Arteries With Versus Without Internal Running Vasa Vasorum Device specificity of vascular healing following implantation of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds and bioabsorbable polymer metallic drug-eluting stents in human coronary arteries: the ESTROFA OCT BVS vs. BP-DES study
|<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >>|

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 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top