CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Uncovered Culprit Plaque Ruptures in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Assessed by Optical Coherence Tomography and Intravascular Ultrasound With iMap Consensus standards for acquisition, measurement, and reporting of intravascular optical coherence tomography studies: a report from the International Working Group for Intravascular Optical Coherence Tomography Standardization and Validation Covering our tracks – optical coherence tomography to assess vascular healing Double-Kiss-Crush Bifurcation Stenting: Step-by-Step Troubleshooting Chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension Device specificity of vascular healing following implantation of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds and bioabsorbable polymer metallic drug-eluting stents in human coronary arteries: the ESTROFA OCT BVS vs. BP-DES study Elaborately Engineering a Self-Indicating Dual-Drug Nanoassembly for Site-Specific Photothermal-Potentiated Thrombus Penetration and Thrombolysis Refined balloon pulmonary angioplasty for inoperable patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension Long-term outcomes of routine versus provisional T-stenting for de novo coronary bifurcation lesions: five-year results of the Bifurcations Bad Krozingen I study Incidence of Adverse Events at 3 Months Versus at 12 Months After Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Cessation in Patients Treated With Thin Stents With Unprotected Left Main or Coronary Bifurcations

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.