CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Left-main restenosis in the DES era-a call for action Aggressive Measures to Decrease Causes of delay and associated mortality in patients transferred with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction Nonsystem reasons for delay in door-to-balloon time and associated in-hospital mortality: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Intravascular ultrasound guidance of percutaneous coronary intervention in ostial chronic total occlusions: a description of the technique and procedural results High-Sensitivity Troponins and Outcomes After Myocardial Infarction Comparison of Benefit of Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion in Patients With Versus Without Reduced (≤40%) Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction DK CRUSH系列研究总结 White Blood Cell Count and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the Contemporary Era: Insights From the PARIS Study (Patterns of Non-Adherence to Anti-Platelet Regimens in Stented Patients Registry) China PEACE risk estimation tool for in-hospital death from acute myocardial infarction: an early risk classification tree for decisions about fibrinolytic therapy
|<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ...>>|

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