CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Antibody-Based Ticagrelor Reversal Agent in Healthy Volunteers Left atrial appendage occlusion in atrial fibrillation patients with previous intracranial bleeding: A national multicenter study Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in elective percutaneous coronary intervention (ALPHEUS): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial A prospective, randomized, open-label trial of 6-month versus 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: Rationale and design of the When, where, and how to target vascular inflammation in the post-CANTOS era? Association Between Depressive Symptoms and Incident Cardiovascular Diseases Efficacy and safety of low-dose colchicine in patients with coronary disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials Comparison of 1-month Versus 12-month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after Implantation of Drug-eluting Stents Guided by either Intravascular Ultrasound or Angiography in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: Rationale and Design of Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled IVUS-ACS & ULTIMATE-DAPT trial Evolocumab for Early Reduction of LDL Cholesterol Levels in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes (EVOPACS) Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease
|<<... 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 ...>>|

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