CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines The effect of complete percutaneous revascularisation with and without intravascular ultrasound guidance in the drugeluting stent era Extracellular Vesicles From Epicardial Fat Facilitate Atrial Fibrillation High-risk plaque detected on coronary CT angiography predicts acute coronary syndromes independent of significant stenosis in acute chest pain: results from the ROMICAT-II trial Prognostic value of coronary artery calcium screening in subjects with and without diabetes Lipid-Modifying Agents, From Statins to PCSK9 Inhibitors: JACC Focus Seminar The Utility of Rapid Atrial Pacing Immediately Post-TAVR to Predict the Need for Pacemaker Implantation Long-term outcomes following mini-crush versus culotte stenting for the treatment of unprotected left main disease: insights from the Milan and New-Tokyo (MITO) registry The impact of intravascular ultrasound guidance during drug eluting stent implantation on angiographic outcomes Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement vs Surgical Replacement in Patients With Pure Aortic Insufficiency

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.