CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

From Detecting the Vulnerable Plaque to Managing the Vulnerable Patient Minimalist transcatheter aortic valve replacement: The new standard for surgeons and cardiologists using transfemoral access? Coronary Access After TAVR Predictors and Clinical Outcomes of Next-Day Discharge After Minimalist Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Coronary calcification in the diagnosis of coronary artery disease 2017 AHA/ACC Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines Increased Risk of Valvular Heart Disease in Systemic Sclerosis: An Underrecognized Cardiac Complication Diagnostic performance of noninvasive myocardial perfusion imaging using single-photon emission computed tomography, cardiac magnetic resonance, and positron emission tomography imaging for the detection of obstructive coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis Impaired Retinal Microvascular Function Predicts Long-Term Adverse Events in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease CT Angiographic and Plaque Predictors of Functionally Significant Coronary Disease and Outcome Using Machine Learning

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.