CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Randomized study on simple versus complex stenting of coronary artery bifurcation lesions: the Nordic bifurcation study Coronary CT Angiographic and Flow Reserve-Guided Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease The Natural History of Nonculprit Lesions in STEMI: An FFR Substudy of the Compare-Acute Trial Contemporary techniques in percutaneous coronary intervention for bifurcation lesions Reply: Will Pulmonary Artery Denervation Really Have a Place in the Armamentarium of the Pulmonary Hypertension Specialist? Treatment of Very Small De Novo Coronary Artery Disease With 2.0 mm Drug-Coated Balloons Showed 1-Year Clinical Outcome Comparable With 2.0 mm Drug-Eluting Stents Pulmonary Artery Denervation: A New, Long-Awaited Interventional Treatment for Combined Pre- and Post-Capillary Pulmonary Hypertension? Influence of Local Myocardial Damage on Index of Microcirculatory Resistance and Fractional Flow Reserve in Target and Nontarget Vascular Territories in a Porcine Microvascular Injury Model Echocardiographic Screening for Pulmonary Hypertension in Congenital Heart Disease A sirolimus-eluting bioabsorbable polymer-coated stent (MiStent) versus an everolimus-eluting durable polymer stent (Xience) after percutaneous coronary intervention (DESSOLVE III): a randomised, single-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial
|<<... 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 ...>>|

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