CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Mortality and morbidity in acutely ill adults treated with liberal versus conservative oxygen therapy (IOTA): a systematic review and meta-analysis Door to Balloon Time: Is There a Point That Is Too Short? Randomized Comparison of Everolimus- and Zotarolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents With Biolimus-Eluting Stents in All-Comer Patients Percutaneous coronary intervention reduces mortality in myocardial infarction patients with comorbidities: Implications for elderly patients with diabetes or kidney disease Remote ischaemic conditioning and healthcare system delay in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction Patterns and associations between DAPT cessation and 2-year clinical outcomes in left main/proximal LAD versus other PCI: Results from the Patterns of Non-Adherence to Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Stented Patients (PARIS) registry Targeting the Immune System in Atherosclerosis: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Obesity, Diabetes, and Acute Coronary Syndrome: Differences Between Asians and Whites Prevention, Diagnosis, and Management of Radiation-Associated Cardiac Disease: JACC Scientific Expert Panel Coronary Catheterization and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in China: 10-Year Results From the China PEACE-Retrospective CathPCI Study
|<<... 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 ...>>|

Review ArticleVolume 73, Issue 8, March 2019

JOURNAL：J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

PCI and CABG for Treating Stable Coronary Artery Disease

T Doenst, A Haverich, P Serruys et al. Keywords: heart team; prognosis; survival benefit

ABSTRACT

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are considered revascularization procedures, but only CABG can prolong life in stable coronary artery disease. Thus, PCI and CABG mechanisms may differ. Viability and/or ischemia detection to guide revascularization have been unable to accurately predict treatment effects of CABG or PCI, questioning a revascularization mechanism for improving survival. By contrast, preventing myocardial infarction may save lives. However, the majority of infarcts are generated by non–flow-limiting stenoses, but PCI is solely focused on treating flow-limiting lesions. Thus, PCI cannot be expected to significantly limit new infarcts, but CABG may do so through providing flow distal to vessel occlusions. All comparisons of CABG to PCI or medical therapy that demonstrate survival effects with CABG also demonstrate infarct reduction. Thus, CABG may differ from PCI by providing “surgical collateralization,” prolonging life by preventing myocardial infarctions. The evidence is reviewed here.

>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 注册

> CBS 2019 会议日程

> CBS 2019 学术征集

> CBS 2019 热点

 CBSMD

> CBSMD 网站注册

> 教育中心

> 荐读文献

> Top 10 阅读文献

> 文献导读
CBS 2019 CBS 2019 主席团 教育中心 科研动态
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top