CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Myocardial Blood Flow and Coronary Flow Reserve During 3 Years Following Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Versus Metallic Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: The VANISH Trial Coronary Artery Intraplaque Microvessels by Optical Coherence Tomography Correlate With Vulnerable Plaque and Predict Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Ischemic Angina Joint consensus on the use of OCT in coronary bifurcation lesions by the European and Japanese bifurcation clubs Management of pulmonary hypertension from left heart disease in candidates for orthotopic heart transplantation Local Low Shear Stress and Endothelial Dysfunction in Patients With Nonobstructive Coronary Atherosclerosis Classification and treatment of coronary artery bifurcation lesions: putting the Medina classification to the test Left ventricular remodelling and changes in functional measurements in patients undergoing transcatheter vs surgical aortic valve replacement: a head-to-head comparison Diagnostic accuracy of intracoronary optical coherence tomography-derived fractional flow reserve for assessment of coronary stenosis severity T and small protrusion (TAP) vs double kissing crush technique: Insights from in-vitro models Optimal Fluoroscopic Projections of Coronary Ostia and Bifurcations Defined by Computed Tomographic Coronary Angiography

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.