Ischemia is the critical determinant of revascularization benefit: An interventionalist's perspective of the COURAGE trial

1Citations
Citations of this article
16Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Although advances in percutaneous catheter-based interventions (PCI) for coronary artery disease have been associated with reductions in angiographic as well as clinical restenosis, no consistent reduction in the occurrence of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) has been observed either between devices (balloon vs bare-metal stent vs drug-eluting stent [DES]) or between device and medically treated patients with chronic stable coronary disease. Objective evidence of myocardial ischemia-irrespective of the methodology used to demonstrate its presence-is qualitatively and quantitatively related to the occurrence of death and/or nonfatal MI. The magnitude of ischemia is directly proportional to the magnitude of revascularization benefit (reduction in death or MI). Revascularization by PCI is more effective in reducing ischemia than medical therapy alone. The evolution of both PCI technology (DES) and adjunctive pharmacology has improved the relative magnitude and durability of PCI benefit compared with medical therapy alone. © 2009 MedReviews® , LLC.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kereiakes, D. J. (2009). Ischemia is the critical determinant of revascularization benefit: An interventionalist’s perspective of the COURAGE trial. Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine. https://doi.org/10.3909/ricm10S20006

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free