CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

光学相关断层扫描

Abstract

Recommended Article

Covering our tracks – optical coherence tomography to assess vascular healing The Relation Between Optical Coherence Tomography-Detected Layered Pattern and Acute Side Branch Occlusion After Provisional Stenting of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions Volumetric characterization of human coronary calcification by frequency-domain optical coherence tomography Optical coherence tomography versus intravascular ultrasound to evaluate coronary artery disease and percutaneous coronary intervention Clinical Predictors for Lack of Favorable Vascular Response to Statin Therapy in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Serial Optical Coherence Tomography Study Lipid-rich plaque and myocardial perfusion after successful stenting in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: an optical coherence tomography study Coronary Atherosclerosis T1-Weighed Characterization With Integrated Anatomical Reference: Comparison With High-Risk Plaque Features Detected by Invasive Coronary Imaging Optical Coherence Tomography-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Prospective Propensity-Matched Cohort of the Thrombectomy Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Alone Trial
|<< 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