How and when to decide on revascularization in stable ischemic heart disease

被引:4
作者
Mecklai A. [1 ]
Bangalore S. [1 ,2 ]
Hochman J. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Leon Charney Division of Cardiology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, 530 First Avenue
[2] Cardiovascular Clinical Research Center, Leon Charney Division of Cardiology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, 530 First Avenue
关键词
Ischemia; Optimal medical therapy; Revascularization; Stable ischemic heart disease;
D O I
10.1007/s11936-012-0214-5
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Opinion statement: Coronary artery disease is the leading cause of death and disability worldwide. While an invasive strategy of early revascularization reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with acute coronary syndromes, there is no convincing evidence that this strategy leads to an incremental survival advantage for patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) beyond that achieved by optimal medical therapy. Two landmark trials, COURAGE and BARI 2D, suggest that a strategy of aggressive medical therapy is a reasonable initial approach to such patients. However, there remain certain groups of patients, those with at least moderate ischemia on baseline stress testing, where there is still clinical equipoise. Major society guidelines favor revascularization based on observational data and trials of CABG conducted decades ago, yet data from modern randomized trials are lacking. Ongoing trials such as ISCHEMIA should provide clinicians with evidence to guide selection of the appropriate initial management strategy for patients with SIHD. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media New York.
引用
收藏
页码:79 / 92
页数:13
相关论文
共 67 条
[1]  
Roger V.L., Go A.S., Lloyd-Jones D.M., Et al., Heart disease and stroke statistics-2012 update: A report from the American Heart Association, Circulation, 125, (2012)
[2]  
Coronary artery surgery study (CASS): A randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Survival data, Circulation, 68, pp. 939-950, (1983)
[3]  
Eleven-year survival in the Veterans Administration randomized trial of coronary bypass surgery for stable angina, N Engl J Med, 311, pp. 1333-1339, (1984)
[4]  
Varnauskas E., Twelve-year follow-up of survival in the randomized European Coronary Surgery Study, N Engl J Med, 319, pp. 332-337, (1988)
[5]  
Serruys P.W., Kutryk M.J., Ong A.T., Coronary-artery stents, N Engl J Med, 354, pp. 483-495, (2006)
[6]  
Feldman D.N., Gade C.L., Slotwiner A.J., Et al., Comparison of outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions in patients of three age groups (<60, 60 to 80, and >80years) (from the New York State Angioplasty Registry), Am J Cardiol, 98, pp. 1334-1339, (2006)
[7]  
Keeley E.C., Boura J.A., Grines C.L., Primary angioplasty vs intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: A quantitative review of 23 randomised trials, Lancet, 361, pp. 13-20, (2003)
[8]  
Baigent C., Keech A., Kearney P.M., Et al., Efficacy and safety of cholesterol-lowering treatment: Prospective meta-analysis of data from 90,056 participants in 14 randomised trials of statins, Lancet, 366, pp. 1267-1278, (2005)
[9]  
Collaborative meta-analysis of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy for prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in high risk patients, BMJ, 324, pp. 71-86, (2002)
[10]  
Al-Mallah M.H., Tleyjeh I.M., Abdel-Latif A.A., Weaver W.D., Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in coronary artery disease and preserved left ventricular systolic function: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, J Am Coll Cardiol, 47, pp. 1576-1583, (2006)