CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

The conductive function of biopolymer corrects myocardial scar conduction blockage and resynchronizes contraction to prevent heart failure The Role of the Pericardium in Heart Failure: Implications for Pathophysiology and Treatment Current treatment of significant left main coronary artery disease: A review Incidence, predictors, and outcomes associated with acute kidney injury in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: from the BRAVO-3 randomized trial Management of Antithrombotic Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation Patients Undergoing PCI: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Long-term effects of intensive glucose lowering on cardiovascular outcomes Coronary plaque redistribution after stent implantation is determined by lipid composition: A NIRS-IVUS analysis Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure for Stroke Prophylaxis in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation: 2.3-Year Follow-up of the PROTECT AF (Watchman Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic Protection in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation) Trial Three vs twelve months of dual antiplatelet therapy after zotarolimus-eluting stents: the OPTIMIZE randomized trial INTERMACS Profiles and Outcomes Among Non–Inotrope-Dependent Outpatients With Heart Failure and 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.