CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

A randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of cardiac contractility modulation in patients with systolic heart failure: rationale, design, and baseline patient characteristics. Aspirin in the primary and secondary prevention of vascular disease: collaborative meta-analysis of individual participant data from randomised trials Second-generation drug-eluting stent implantation followed by 6- versus 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy: the SECURITY randomized clinical trial Surgery Does Not Improve Survival in Patients With Isolated Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation Poor R-wave progression as a predictor of sudden cardiac death in general population and subjects with coronary artery disease Canagliflozin and Cardiovascular and Renal Events in Type 2 Diabetes Use of Intravascular Ultrasound Imaging in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention to Treat Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Rationale and design of the comParIson Of sacubitril/valsartaN versus Enalapril on Effect on nt-pRo-bnp in patients stabilized from an acute Heart Failure episode (PIONEER-HF) trial 6-Month Versus 12-Month Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy Following Long Everolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation: The IVUS-XPL Randomized Clinical Trial Clinical epidemiology of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in comparatively young hospitalized patients
|<<... 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 ...>>|

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