Cargando…

Debate: When should we intervene in unstable angina - Time for an old look?

Current treatment modalities for patients with acute coronary syndromes center on early diagnosis, risk stratification and, increasingly, early treatment including invasive approaches. The appropriate timing of these invasive modalities in the context of the overall treatment program remains an area...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Laskey, Warren K
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2000
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC59589/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11714399
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cvm-1-1-015
_version_ 1782120079606939648
author Laskey, Warren K
author_facet Laskey, Warren K
author_sort Laskey, Warren K
collection PubMed
description Current treatment modalities for patients with acute coronary syndromes center on early diagnosis, risk stratification and, increasingly, early treatment including invasive approaches. The appropriate timing of these invasive modalities in the context of the overall treatment program remains an area of controversy. Specifically, studies in the past recommended a period of medical 'stabilization' while current approaches are considerably more aggressive. The potential hazard of early intervention, in particular, has not properly been weighed against the benefit. This article hopes to provide a framework for examining the appropriate timing of intervention, specifically percutaneous coronary intervention, in acute coronary syndromes.
format Text
id pubmed-59589
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2000
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-595892001-11-06 Debate: When should we intervene in unstable angina - Time for an old look? Laskey, Warren K Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med Commentary Current treatment modalities for patients with acute coronary syndromes center on early diagnosis, risk stratification and, increasingly, early treatment including invasive approaches. The appropriate timing of these invasive modalities in the context of the overall treatment program remains an area of controversy. Specifically, studies in the past recommended a period of medical 'stabilization' while current approaches are considerably more aggressive. The potential hazard of early intervention, in particular, has not properly been weighed against the benefit. This article hopes to provide a framework for examining the appropriate timing of intervention, specifically percutaneous coronary intervention, in acute coronary syndromes. BioMed Central 2000 2000-08-04 /pmc/articles/PMC59589/ /pubmed/11714399 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cvm-1-1-015 Text en Copyright © 2000 Current Controlled Trials Ltd
spellingShingle Commentary
Laskey, Warren K
Debate: When should we intervene in unstable angina - Time for an old look?
title Debate: When should we intervene in unstable angina - Time for an old look?
title_full Debate: When should we intervene in unstable angina - Time for an old look?
title_fullStr Debate: When should we intervene in unstable angina - Time for an old look?
title_full_unstemmed Debate: When should we intervene in unstable angina - Time for an old look?
title_short Debate: When should we intervene in unstable angina - Time for an old look?
title_sort debate: when should we intervene in unstable angina - time for an old look?
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC59589/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11714399
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cvm-1-1-015
work_keys_str_mv AT laskeywarrenk debatewhenshouldweinterveneinunstableanginatimeforanoldlook