CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease Coronary Microcirculation in Ischemic Heart Disease Evolocumab for Early Reduction of LDL Cholesterol Levels in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes (EVOPACS) Left Main Revascularization in 2017: Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention? A prospective, randomized, open-label trial of 6-month versus 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: Rationale and design of the Low Endothelial Shear Stress Predicts Evolution to High-Risk Coronary Plaque Phenotype in the Future: A Serial Optical Coherence Tomography and Computational Fluid Dynamics Study Impact of SYNTAX Score on 10-Year Outcomes After Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in elective percutaneous coronary intervention (ALPHEUS): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial Antibody-Based Ticagrelor Reversal Agent in Healthy Volunteers Inflammation and cholesterol as predictors of cardiovascular events among patients receiving statin therapy: a collaborative analysis of three randomised trials

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.