CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Ablation Versus Drug Therapy for Atrial Fibrillation in Heart Failure Results From the CABANA Trial Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion for Patients in Atrial Fibrillation Suboptimal for Warfarin Therapy: 5-year Results of the PLAATO (Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Transcatheter Occlusion) Study Does pulsed field ablation regress over time? A quantitative temporal analysis of pulmonary vein isolation The management of secondary mitral regurgitation in patients with heart failure: a joint position statement from the Heart Failure Association (HFA), European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI), European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) of the ESC Prospective Evaluation of Transseptal TMVR for Failed Surgical Bioprostheses: MITRAL Trial Valve-in-Valve Arm 1-Year Outcomes Current Status and Future Prospects of Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Endoplasmic reticulum stress in doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity may be therapeutically targeted by natural and chemical compounds: A review Single direct oral anticoagulant therapy in stable patients with atrial fibrillation beyond 1 year after coronary stent implantation Strain-Guided Management of Potentially Cardiotoxic Cancer Therapy Functional Mitral Regurgitation Outcome and Grading in Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction

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.