CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Appropriate Use Criteria and Health Status Outcomes Following Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the OPEN-CTO Registry Clinician’s Guide to Reducing Inflammation to Reduce Atherothrombotic Risk Impact of Coronary Lesion Complexity in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: One-Year Outcomes From the Large, Multicentre e-Ultimaster Registry Proportion and Morphological Features of Restenosis Lesions With Acute Coronary Syndrome in Different Timings of Target Lesion Revascularization After Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation Pharmacotherapy in the Management of Anxiety and Pain During Acute Coronary Syndromes and the Risk of Developing Symptoms of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Intensive Care Utilization in Stable Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated With Rapid Reperfusion The Prognostic Significance of Periprocedural Infarction in the Era of Potent Antithrombotic Therapy: The PRAGUE-18 Substudy A Test in Context: E/A and E/e' to Assess Diastolic Dysfunction and LV Filling Pressure Linking Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection, Cervical Artery Dissection, and Fibromuscular Dysplasia: Heart, Brain, and Kidneys Selection of stenting approach for coronary bifurcation lesions

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.