CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Positive remodeling at 3 year follow up is associated with plaque-free coronary wall segment at baseline: a serial IVUS study A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized, Open-label Trial to Compare Efficacy and Safety of Clopidogrel vs. Ticagrelor in Stabilized Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction after Percutan eous Coronary Intervention: rationale and design of the TALOS-AMI trial The role of integrated backscatter intravascular ultrasound in characterizing bare metal and drug-eluting stent restenotic neointima as compared to optical coherence tomography Association of White Matter Hyperintensities and Cardiovascular Disease: The Importance of Microcirculatory Disease Comparison of newer generation self-expandable vs. balloon-expandable valves in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the randomized SOLVE-TAVI trial Edoxaban versus Vitamin K Antagonist for Atrial Fibrillation after TAVR Coronary calcium as a predictor of coronary events in four racial or ethnic groups Right ventricular function and outcome in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement Impact of Staging Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Left Main Artery Disease: Insights From the EXCEL Trial Second vs. First generation drug eluting stents in multiple vessel disease and left main stenosis: Two-year follow-up of the observational, prospective, controlled, and multicenter ERACI IV registry

Review ArticleVolume 74, Issue 25, December 2019

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Limitations of Repeat Revascularization as an Outcome Measure

P Lamelas, J Belardi, R Whitlock et al. Keywords: CABG; coronary artery disease; PCI; revascularization

ABSTRACT

Repeat revascularization is a commonly used outcome measure in trials comparing percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery, and differences in this outcome often drive the relative risk for the primary endpoint. However, repeat revascularization as an outcome measure has important limitations that complicates its meaningful interpretation, including confounding by indication (driven by varying use of stress testing and thresholds for invasive angiography), differential likelihood of revascularization after graft versus stent failure, uncertainty of the prognostic impact of repeat revascularization, and patient preferences and appraisal of the import of repeat revascularization. Knowledge of these issues will result in better appreciation of the utility of repeat revascularization as a clinically meaningful outcome measure. The authors describe these issues and provide recommendations for the use and assessment of repeat revascularization as an endpoint when comparing different revascularization modalities.