Why percutaneous revascularisation might not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and mortality in patients with stable CAD?

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is widely adopted to treat chronic coronary artery disease. Numerous randomised trials have been conducted to test whether PCI may provide any prognostic advantage over oral medical therapy (OMT) alone, without definitive results. This has maintained the para...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Benenati, Stefano, De Maria, Giovanni Luigi, Kotronias, Rafail, Porto, Italo, Banning, Adrian P
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Coronary Artery Disease
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10619108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37890892
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2023-002343
_version_ 1785129916289777664
author Benenati, Stefano
De Maria, Giovanni Luigi
Kotronias, Rafail
Porto, Italo
Banning, Adrian P
author_facet Benenati, Stefano
De Maria, Giovanni Luigi
Kotronias, Rafail
Porto, Italo
Banning, Adrian P
author_sort Benenati, Stefano
collection PubMed
description Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is widely adopted to treat chronic coronary artery disease. Numerous randomised trials have been conducted to test whether PCI may provide any prognostic advantage over oral medical therapy (OMT) alone, without definitive results. This has maintained the paradigm of OMT as the first-line standard of care for patients, reserving PCI for symptom control. In this review, we discuss the current evidence in favour and against PCI in stable coronary syndromes and highlight the pitfalls of the available studies. We offer a critical appraisal of the possible reasons why the existing data does not provide evidence supporting the role of PCI in improving clinical outcomes in patients with stable coronary syndromes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10619108
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106191082023-11-02 Why percutaneous revascularisation might not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and mortality in patients with stable CAD? Benenati, Stefano De Maria, Giovanni Luigi Kotronias, Rafail Porto, Italo Banning, Adrian P Open Heart Coronary Artery Disease Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is widely adopted to treat chronic coronary artery disease. Numerous randomised trials have been conducted to test whether PCI may provide any prognostic advantage over oral medical therapy (OMT) alone, without definitive results. This has maintained the paradigm of OMT as the first-line standard of care for patients, reserving PCI for symptom control. In this review, we discuss the current evidence in favour and against PCI in stable coronary syndromes and highlight the pitfalls of the available studies. We offer a critical appraisal of the possible reasons why the existing data does not provide evidence supporting the role of PCI in improving clinical outcomes in patients with stable coronary syndromes. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-10-27 /pmc/articles/PMC10619108/ /pubmed/37890892 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2023-002343 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Coronary Artery Disease
Benenati, Stefano
De Maria, Giovanni Luigi
Kotronias, Rafail
Porto, Italo
Banning, Adrian P
Why percutaneous revascularisation might not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and mortality in patients with stable CAD?
title Why percutaneous revascularisation might not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and mortality in patients with stable CAD?
title_full Why percutaneous revascularisation might not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and mortality in patients with stable CAD?
title_fullStr Why percutaneous revascularisation might not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and mortality in patients with stable CAD?
title_full_unstemmed Why percutaneous revascularisation might not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and mortality in patients with stable CAD?
title_short Why percutaneous revascularisation might not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and mortality in patients with stable CAD?
title_sort why percutaneous revascularisation might not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and mortality in patients with stable cad?
topic Coronary Artery Disease
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10619108/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37890892
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/openhrt-2023-002343
work_keys_str_mv AT benenatistefano whypercutaneousrevascularisationmightnotreducetheriskofmyocardialinfarctionandmortalityinpatientswithstablecad
AT demariagiovanniluigi whypercutaneousrevascularisationmightnotreducetheriskofmyocardialinfarctionandmortalityinpatientswithstablecad
AT kotroniasrafail whypercutaneousrevascularisationmightnotreducetheriskofmyocardialinfarctionandmortalityinpatientswithstablecad
AT portoitalo whypercutaneousrevascularisationmightnotreducetheriskofmyocardialinfarctionandmortalityinpatientswithstablecad
AT banningadrianp whypercutaneousrevascularisationmightnotreducetheriskofmyocardialinfarctionandmortalityinpatientswithstablecad

Ejemplares similares