CBS - The 17th Left Main & Coronary Bifurcation Summit, CBS2025

HOME
CBS 2019
At CBS

General Information

Left Main & Coronary Bifurcation Summit (CBS) was founded in 2006 as a think tank dedicated to the treatment of left main and coronary bifurcation lesions. CBS aims to improve cardiological care by refreshing fundamental researches, clinical trials, yearly published guidelines, emerged ideas and case-based discussion.

Association and Affiliations
- Organized by
  
  Nanjing Heart Center
  
  Asian Bifurcation Club (ABC)
  
  Nanjing First Hospital, Nanjing Medical University
- Co-organized by
  
  Chinese Society of Cardiology (CSC)
  
  Capacity Building and Continuing Education Center,National Health and Family Planning Commission (CBCEC)
  
  American Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI)
  
  Asian Heart Society (AHS)
Contact Us
- Registration Administration of Domestic Representatives
  
  Hongjuan Peng : +86-13913895477
  
  Haimei Xu +86-13914736846
  
  cbsnj@cbsmd.cn
- Registration Administration of Overseas Representatives
  
  Ling Lin : +86 (25) 52271398
  
  +86-13951884596
  
  cbs@cbsmd.cn
- Management of Challenging Cases
  
  Yingying Zhao :+86-13815408517
  
  sub@cbsmd.cn
Address

CBS2019 Congress Secretariat, Nanjing First Hospital, Building No.9 68# Changle Road, Nanjing, China

210006
FACULTY
FACULTY

General Chairman
Congress Chairman
Course Directors International Faculty Domestic Faculty Hong Kong and Taiwan Faculty Members of Academic Committee
Education Center

Education Center

• Online Education (For more customized user interface with self-defined collection of research papers and education resources.)

• CBS Education Resource

• CBSMD Scientific Library
SCIENTIFIC LIBRARY

SCIENTIFIC LIBRARY

Research Paper

> Acute Coronary Syndrom

> ASCVD Prevention

> Bifurcation Stenting

> Cardio-Oncology

> Congestive Heart Failure

> DAPT Duration

> Drug Coated Balloon

> Fractional Flow Reserve

> IVUS Guidance

> Optical Coherence Tomography

> Pulmonary Hypertension

> Rotational Atherectomy

> Shear Stress

> Stenting Left Main

> Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

> Percutaneous LAA Occlusion

> Mitral/Tricuspid Valvular Disease

> Other Relevant Articles

Recommended Paper

Management of Acute Myocardial Infarction During the COVID-19 Pandemic

COVID-19 and Thrombotic or Thromboembolic Disease: Implications for Prevention, Antithrombotic Therapy, and Follow-up

CSC Expert Consensus on Principles of Clinical Management of Patients with Severe Emergent Cardiovascular Diseases during the COVID-19 Epidemic

ACC Clinical Bulletin Focuses on Cardiac Implications of Coronavirus (COVID-19)

HOME | SCIENTIFIC LIBRARY | Scientific Library

Scientific Library

Limitations of Repeat Revascularization as an Outcome Measure Canagliflozin and Renal Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes and Nephropathy Microthrombi As A Major Cause of Cardiac Injury in COVID-19: A Pathologic Study The year in cardiovascular medicine 2020: heart failure and cardiomyopathies Better Prognosis After Complete Revascularization Using Contemporary Coronary Stents in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease Systemic microvascular dysfunction in microvascular and vasospastic angina Digital learning and the future cardiologist Rotational atherectomy and new-generation drug-eluting stent implantation

Sort by hits |<<... 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 ...>>|

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.

Abstract

Recommended Article

Limitations of Repeat Revascularization as an Outcome Measure

ABSTRACT