CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

推荐文献

Abstract

Recommended Article

Biological Phenotypes of Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction White Blood Cell Count and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the Contemporary Era: Insights From the PARIS Study (Patterns of Non-Adherence to Anti-Platelet Regimens in Stented Patients Registry) DK CRUSH系列研究总结 From Nonclinical Research to Clinical Trials and Patient-registries: Challenges and Opportunities in Biomedical Research Comparison of Benefit of Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion in Patients With Versus Without Reduced (≤40%) Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Quantitative angiography methods for bifurcation lesions: a consensus statement update from the European Bifurcation Club High-Risk Coronary Atherosclerosis: Is It the Plaque Burden, the Calcium, the Lipid, or Something Else? Comparative analysis of recurrent events after presentation with an index myocardial infarction or ischaemic stroke

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.