CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Readmissions Where Are the Solutions? Impact of Oxidative Stress on the Heart and Vasculature: Part 2 of a 3-Part Series Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Translational Perspective on Epigenetics in Cardiovascular Disease Impact of Abnormal Coronary Reactivity on Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Women Eruptive Calcified Nodules as a Potential Mechanism of Acute Coronary Thrombosis and Sudden Death Coronary Artery Calcium Progression Is Associated With Coronary Plaque Volume Progression - Results From a Quantitative Semiautomated Coronary Artery Plaque Analysis New AHA/ACC/HRS Guidance on Sudden Cardiac Death Prevention Patient Characteristics Associated With Antianginal Medication Escalation and De-Escalation Following Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the OPEN CTO Registry 2017 AHA/ACC Clinical Performance and Quality Measures for Adults With ST-Elevation and Non–ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures
|<<... 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 ...>>|

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