CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Radial Versus Femoral Access for Rotational Atherectomy: A UK Observational Study of 8622 Patients Non-cardiac surgery in patients with coronary artery disease: risk evaluation and periprocedural management Safety and feasibility of robotic percutaneous coronary intervention: PRECISE (Percutaneous Robotically-Enhanced Coronary Intervention) Study Effect of Side Branch Predilation in Coronary Bifurcation Stenting With the Provisional Approach - Results From the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) II Registry Management of No-Reflow Phenomenon in the Catheterization Laboratory Select Drug-Drug Interactions With Direct Oral Anticoagulants The performance of non-invasive tests to rule-in and rule-out significant coronary artery stenosis in patients with stable angina: a meta-analysis focused on post-test disease probability Quantitative Assessment of Coronary Microvascular Function: Dynamic Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography, Positron Emission Tomography, Ultrasound, Computed Tomography, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Cardiac MRI Endpoints in Myocardial Infarction Experimental and Clinical Trials JACC Scientific Expert Panel Influence of LDL-Cholesterol Lowering on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus Undergoing Coronary Revascularization
|<<... 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 ...>>|

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