CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

The Current State of Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention sST2 Predicts Outcome in Chronic Heart Failure Beyond NT−proBNP and High-Sensitivity Troponin T Genetics and Causality of Triglyceride-Rich Lipoproteins in Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Glucose-lowering Drugs or Strategies, Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Events, and Heart Failure in People With or at Risk of Type 2 Diabetes: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Cardiovascular Outcome Trials Potential protective mechanisms of green tea polyphenol EGCG against COVID-19 Prevention of Bleeding in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing PCI Radial Versus Femoral Access for Rotational Atherectomy: A UK Observational Study of 8622 Patients Effect of empagliflozin on exercise ability and symptoms in heart failure patients with reduced and preserved ejection fraction, with and without type 2 diabetes The outcomes of intravascular ultrasound-guided drug-eluting stent implantation among patients with complex coronary lesions: a comprehensive meta-analysis of 15 clinical trials and 8,084 patients Limitations of Repeat Revascularization as an Outcome Measure
|<<... 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 ...>>|

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.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 注册

> CBS 2019 会议日程

> CBS 2019 学术征集

> CBS 2019 热点

 CBSMD

> CBSMD 网站注册

> 教育中心

> 荐读文献

> Top 10 阅读文献

> 文献导读
CBS 2019 CBS 2019 主席团 教育中心 科研动态
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top