Why the study?
Anatomical and ischemic definitions of complete revascularization and their assessment methodologies remain highly variable, contributing to a lack of standardized approaches for invasive CAD treatment.
Provides a standardized approach to defining and assessing complete revascularization, addressing the current lack of consensus in clinical practice and trials.
May standardize post-PCI/CABG assessment; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
Guideline-based medical therapy is the foundation of treatment for individuals with coronary artery disease. However, revascularization with either percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting may be beneficial in patients with acute coronary syndromes, refractory symptoms, or in other specific scenarios (eg, left main disease and heart failure). While the goal of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting is to achieve complete revascularization, anatomical and ischemic definitions of complete revascularization and their methodology for assessment remain highly variable. Such lack of consensus invariably contributes to the absence of standardized approaches for invasive treatment of coronary artery disease. Herein, we propose a novel, comprehensive, yet pragmatic algorithm with both anatomical and ischemic parameters that aims to provide a systematic method to assess complete revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting in both clinical practice and clinical trials.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ali et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: