CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

In-Hospital Costs and Costs of Complications of Chronic Total Occlusion Angioplasty Insights From the OPEN-CTO Registry Long-term outcomes of rotational atherectomy of underexpanded stents. A single center experience Double kissing crush in left main coronary bifurcation lesions: A crushing blow to the rival stenting techniques Chronic Kidney Disease and Coronary Artery Disease Left Ventricular Assist Devices: Synergistic Model Between Technology and Medicine Diagnostic performance of stress perfusion cardiac magnetic resonance for the detection of coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis Catheterization Laboratory Considerations During the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic: From the ACC’s Interventional Council and SCAI Drug-eluting balloons in coronary interventions: the quiet revolution? Classification of Deaths in Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials Known Unknowns and Unknown Unknowns Ejection Fraction Pros and Cons: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

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.