CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Infective endocarditis after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a nationwide study Randomized Evaluation of TriGuard 3 Cerebral Embolic Protection After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: REFLECT II Extracellular Myocardial Volume in Patients With Aortic Stenosis Computed tomography angiography-derived extracellular volume fraction predicts early recovery of left ventricular systolic function after transcatheter aortic valve replacement Impact of Staging Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Left Main Artery Disease: Insights From the EXCEL Trial Contemporary Use and Trends in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States: An Analysis of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Research to Practice Initiative Impact of Pre-Existing and New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation on Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Thrombotic Versus Bleeding Risk After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: JACC Review Topic of the Week Long-term health outcome and mortality evaluation after invasive coronary treatment using drug eluting stents with or without the IVUS guidance. Randomized control trial. HOME DES IVUS Intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention improves the clinical outcome in patients undergoing multiple overlapping drug-eluting stents implantation
|<<... 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 ...>>|

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