CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Italian Society of Interventional Cardiology (GIse) Registry Of Transcatheter Treatment of Mitral Valve RegurgitaTiOn (GIOTTO): Impact of Valve Disease Etiology and Residual Mitral Regurgitation after MitraClip Implantation The Tricuspid Annular Plane Systolic Excursion to Systolic Pulmonary Artery Pressure Index: Association With All-Cause Mortality in Patients With Moderate or Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation Transcatheter Interventions for Tricuspid Valve Disease: What to Do and Who to Do it On Pathophysiology, diagnosis and new therapeutic approaches for ischemic mitral regurgitation Risk of Atrial Fibrillation According to Cancer Type: A Nationwide Population-Based Study An artificial intelligence-enabled ECG algorithm for the identification of patients with atrial fibrillation during sinus rhythm: a retrospective analysis of outcome prediction Incidence and Standardized Definitions of Mitral Valve Leaflet Adverse Events After Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair: the EXPAND Study Outcomes of TTVI in Patients With Pacemaker or Defibrillator Leads: Data From the TriValve Registry Novel Transcatheter Mitral Valve Prosthesis for Patients With Severe Mitral Annular Calcification Cardio-Oncology Services: rationale, organization, and implementation: A report from the ESC Cardio-Oncology council
|<<... 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 ...>>|

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