April 16, 2012Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
Percutaneous coronary revascularization in coronary artery disease: Lessons from a single center experience
Why the study?
Does percutaneous coronary intervention improve survival compared to medical management alone in patients with stable coronary artery disease?
Population
3,375 patients with stable coronary artery disease, excluding acute coronary syndromes, low ejection…
Comparison
Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs Medical management alone
Design
Cohort
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
PCI may improve survival in stable CAD; leaves open need for randomized confirmation before practice change.
Structured PICO
Does percutaneous coronary intervention improve survival compared to medical management alone in patients with stable coronary artery disease?
P
Population
3,375 patients with stable coronary artery disease (positive stress test and >70% coronary stenosis or symptoms of angina and >80% coronary stenosis), excluding acute coronary syndromes, low ejection fraction, history of CABG, and CABG following index catheterization. Mean age 65 ± 11 years, 69% men.
I
Intervention
Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)
C
Comparator
Medical management alone
O
Outcome
All-cause mortality (obtained from the social security death index)hard clinical
In a single-center propensity-matched registry analysis, PCI was associated with improved survival compared to medical management alone in patients with stable coronary artery disease.
Limitations
- Single center registry analysis
- Retrospective observational design requiring propensity matching
Cite This Study
Aksoy et al. (2012) studied this question.