CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration in Medically Managed Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: Sub-Analysis of the OPT-CAD Study Why NOBLE and EXCEL Are Consistent With Each Other and With Previous Trials 1-Year Outcomes of Delayed Versus Immediate Intervention in Patients With Transient ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction 5-Year Outcomes After TAVR With Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Valves: Results From the CHOICE Randomized Clinical Trial Accuracy of Fractional Flow Reserve Derived From Coronary Angiography Differential prognostic effect of intravascular ultrasound use according to implanted stent length Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Role of Multimodality Imaging in Common and Complex Clinical Scenarios Association of Sustained Blood Pressure Control with Multimorbidity Progression Among Older Adults Nonculprit Lesion Plaque Morphology in Patients With ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Results From the COMPLETE Trial Optical Coherence Tomography Substudys Differential Impact of Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction on Men and Women
|<<... 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 ...>>|

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.
>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