Is it time to change how we think about incomplete coronary revascularization?
Abstract The optimal degree of revascularization for patients with chronic multivessel coronary artery disease remains an unsolved issue. Intuitively, complete revascularization decreases cardiovascular events and improves outcomes compared to incomplete procedures, but in recent years the concept o...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | International journal of cardiology 2016-12, Vol.224, p.295-298 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 298 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | 295 |
| container_title | International journal of cardiology |
| container_volume | 224 |
| creator | Spadaccio, Cristiano Nappi, Francesco Nenna, Antonio Beattie, Gwyn Chello, Massimo Sutherland, Fraser W.H |
| description | Abstract The optimal degree of revascularization for patients with chronic multivessel coronary artery disease remains an unsolved issue. Intuitively, complete revascularization decreases cardiovascular events and improves outcomes compared to incomplete procedures, but in recent years the concept of incomplete revascularization moved from a sub-optimal or a defective treatment towards the most appropriate revascularization technique in some categories of patients. A reasonable level of incomplete anatomic revascularization has been shown to be safe and achievable with both percutaneous (PCI) and surgical procedures (CABG), despite with different long-term outcomes. What are the mechanisms underlying the clinical benefits of an incomplete revascularization and what are the factors explaining the discrepancy in the long-term clinical outcomes between the two modes of revascularization PCI and CABG? The biological consequences of coronary reperfusion might provide valuable hints in this context and at the same time cast new light on the way we think about incomplete revascularization. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.09.055 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1835523099</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0167527316323117</els_id><sourcerecordid>1835523099</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-ec8e77ed8e460529a9af428e189eb81a9fb1ca035b133d7abb0c3a8a5a7411053</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU1v1DAQhi0EotvCP0DIRy4JdmzH9gWEqlIqVeUAnC3HmWWdJvZiO63Kr8erLRy49DSamXe-nkHoDSUtJbR_P7V-cjaNbVe9luiWCPEMbaiSvKFS8OdoUxOyEZ1kJ-g054kQwrVWL9FJJ_tecEI26OYqY19w8QvgErHb2fAT8C7e4_sa2Plwi-0Q14J9cHHZz1AAu5hisOkBJ7iz2a2zTf63LT6Gj6_Qi62dM7x-tGfox-eL7-dfmuuvl1fnn64bx6ksDTgFUsKogPdEdNpqu-WdAqo0DIpavR2os4SJgTI2SjsMxDGrrLCSU0oEO0Pvjn33Kf5aIRez-Oxgnm2AuGZDFROiY0TrKuVHqUsx5wRbs09-qesbSsyBpJnMkaQ5kDREm0qylr19nLAOC4z_iv6iq4IPRwHUO-88JJOdh-Bg9AlcMWP0T034v4GbffDOzrfwAHmKawqVoaEmd4aYb4dvHp5Je9YxSiX7A3i3m4o</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1835523099</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Is it time to change how we think about incomplete coronary revascularization?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Spadaccio, Cristiano ; Nappi, Francesco ; Nenna, Antonio ; Beattie, Gwyn ; Chello, Massimo ; Sutherland, Fraser W.H</creator><creatorcontrib>Spadaccio, Cristiano ; Nappi, Francesco ; Nenna, Antonio ; Beattie, Gwyn ; Chello, Massimo ; Sutherland, Fraser W.H</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract The optimal degree of revascularization for patients with chronic multivessel coronary artery disease remains an unsolved issue. Intuitively, complete revascularization decreases cardiovascular events and improves outcomes compared to incomplete procedures, but in recent years the concept of incomplete revascularization moved from a sub-optimal or a defective treatment towards the most appropriate revascularization technique in some categories of patients. A reasonable level of incomplete anatomic revascularization has been shown to be safe and achievable with both percutaneous (PCI) and surgical procedures (CABG), despite with different long-term outcomes. What are the mechanisms underlying the clinical benefits of an incomplete revascularization and what are the factors explaining the discrepancy in the long-term clinical outcomes between the two modes of revascularization PCI and CABG? The biological consequences of coronary reperfusion might provide valuable hints in this context and at the same time cast new light on the way we think about incomplete revascularization.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0167-5273</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1874-1754</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.09.055</identifier><identifier>PMID: 27665400</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Angiogenesis ; CABG ; Cardiovascular ; Clinical Trials as Topic - methods ; Complete revascularization ; Coronary Artery Bypass - methods ; Coronary Artery Bypass - trends ; Coronary Artery Disease - diagnostic imaging ; Coronary Artery Disease - surgery ; Humans ; Incomplete revascularization ; Myocardial Revascularization - methods ; Myocardial Revascularization - trends ; Nitric oxide ; PCI ; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - methods ; Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - trends</subject><ispartof>International journal of cardiology, 2016-12, Vol.224, p.295-298</ispartof><rights>2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-ec8e77ed8e460529a9af428e189eb81a9fb1ca035b133d7abb0c3a8a5a7411053</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-ec8e77ed8e460529a9af428e189eb81a9fb1ca035b133d7abb0c3a8a5a7411053</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167527316323117$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27665400$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Spadaccio, Cristiano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nappi, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nenna, Antonio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beattie, Gwyn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chello, Massimo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sutherland, Fraser W.H</creatorcontrib><title>Is it time to change how we think about incomplete coronary revascularization?</title><title>International journal of cardiology</title><addtitle>Int J Cardiol</addtitle><description>Abstract The optimal degree of revascularization for patients with chronic multivessel coronary artery disease remains an unsolved issue. Intuitively, complete revascularization decreases cardiovascular events and improves outcomes compared to incomplete procedures, but in recent years the concept of incomplete revascularization moved from a sub-optimal or a defective treatment towards the most appropriate revascularization technique in some categories of patients. A reasonable level of incomplete anatomic revascularization has been shown to be safe and achievable with both percutaneous (PCI) and surgical procedures (CABG), despite with different long-term outcomes. What are the mechanisms underlying the clinical benefits of an incomplete revascularization and what are the factors explaining the discrepancy in the long-term clinical outcomes between the two modes of revascularization PCI and CABG? The biological consequences of coronary reperfusion might provide valuable hints in this context and at the same time cast new light on the way we think about incomplete revascularization.</description><subject>Angiogenesis</subject><subject>CABG</subject><subject>Cardiovascular</subject><subject>Clinical Trials as Topic - methods</subject><subject>Complete revascularization</subject><subject>Coronary Artery Bypass - methods</subject><subject>Coronary Artery Bypass - trends</subject><subject>Coronary Artery Disease - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Coronary Artery Disease - surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Incomplete revascularization</subject><subject>Myocardial Revascularization - methods</subject><subject>Myocardial Revascularization - trends</subject><subject>Nitric oxide</subject><subject>PCI</subject><subject>Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - methods</subject><subject>Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - trends</subject><issn>0167-5273</issn><issn>1874-1754</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU1v1DAQhi0EotvCP0DIRy4JdmzH9gWEqlIqVeUAnC3HmWWdJvZiO63Kr8erLRy49DSamXe-nkHoDSUtJbR_P7V-cjaNbVe9luiWCPEMbaiSvKFS8OdoUxOyEZ1kJ-g054kQwrVWL9FJJ_tecEI26OYqY19w8QvgErHb2fAT8C7e4_sa2Plwi-0Q14J9cHHZz1AAu5hisOkBJ7iz2a2zTf63LT6Gj6_Qi62dM7x-tGfox-eL7-dfmuuvl1fnn64bx6ksDTgFUsKogPdEdNpqu-WdAqo0DIpavR2os4SJgTI2SjsMxDGrrLCSU0oEO0Pvjn33Kf5aIRez-Oxgnm2AuGZDFROiY0TrKuVHqUsx5wRbs09-qesbSsyBpJnMkaQ5kDREm0qylr19nLAOC4z_iv6iq4IPRwHUO-88JJOdh-Bg9AlcMWP0T034v4GbffDOzrfwAHmKawqVoaEmd4aYb4dvHp5Je9YxSiX7A3i3m4o</recordid><startdate>20161201</startdate><enddate>20161201</enddate><creator>Spadaccio, Cristiano</creator><creator>Nappi, Francesco</creator><creator>Nenna, Antonio</creator><creator>Beattie, Gwyn</creator><creator>Chello, Massimo</creator><creator>Sutherland, Fraser W.H</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20161201</creationdate><title>Is it time to change how we think about incomplete coronary revascularization?</title><author>Spadaccio, Cristiano ; Nappi, Francesco ; Nenna, Antonio ; Beattie, Gwyn ; Chello, Massimo ; Sutherland, Fraser W.H</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-ec8e77ed8e460529a9af428e189eb81a9fb1ca035b133d7abb0c3a8a5a7411053</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Angiogenesis</topic><topic>CABG</topic><topic>Cardiovascular</topic><topic>Clinical Trials as Topic - methods</topic><topic>Complete revascularization</topic><topic>Coronary Artery Bypass - methods</topic><topic>Coronary Artery Bypass - trends</topic><topic>Coronary Artery Disease - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Coronary Artery Disease - surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Incomplete revascularization</topic><topic>Myocardial Revascularization - methods</topic><topic>Myocardial Revascularization - trends</topic><topic>Nitric oxide</topic><topic>PCI</topic><topic>Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - methods</topic><topic>Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - trends</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Spadaccio, Cristiano</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nappi, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nenna, Antonio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beattie, Gwyn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chello, Massimo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sutherland, Fraser W.H</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>International journal of cardiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Spadaccio, Cristiano</au><au>Nappi, Francesco</au><au>Nenna, Antonio</au><au>Beattie, Gwyn</au><au>Chello, Massimo</au><au>Sutherland, Fraser W.H</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Is it time to change how we think about incomplete coronary revascularization?</atitle><jtitle>International journal of cardiology</jtitle><addtitle>Int J Cardiol</addtitle><date>2016-12-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>224</volume><spage>295</spage><epage>298</epage><pages>295-298</pages><issn>0167-5273</issn><eissn>1874-1754</eissn><abstract>Abstract The optimal degree of revascularization for patients with chronic multivessel coronary artery disease remains an unsolved issue. Intuitively, complete revascularization decreases cardiovascular events and improves outcomes compared to incomplete procedures, but in recent years the concept of incomplete revascularization moved from a sub-optimal or a defective treatment towards the most appropriate revascularization technique in some categories of patients. A reasonable level of incomplete anatomic revascularization has been shown to be safe and achievable with both percutaneous (PCI) and surgical procedures (CABG), despite with different long-term outcomes. What are the mechanisms underlying the clinical benefits of an incomplete revascularization and what are the factors explaining the discrepancy in the long-term clinical outcomes between the two modes of revascularization PCI and CABG? The biological consequences of coronary reperfusion might provide valuable hints in this context and at the same time cast new light on the way we think about incomplete revascularization.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>27665400</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.09.055</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0167-5273 |
| ispartof | International journal of cardiology, 2016-12, Vol.224, p.295-298 |
| issn | 0167-5273 1874-1754 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1835523099 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | Angiogenesis CABG Cardiovascular Clinical Trials as Topic - methods Complete revascularization Coronary Artery Bypass - methods Coronary Artery Bypass - trends Coronary Artery Disease - diagnostic imaging Coronary Artery Disease - surgery Humans Incomplete revascularization Myocardial Revascularization - methods Myocardial Revascularization - trends Nitric oxide PCI Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - methods Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - trends |
| title | Is it time to change how we think about incomplete coronary revascularization? |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T01%3A54%3A31IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Is%20it%20time%20to%20change%20how%20we%20think%20about%20incomplete%20coronary%20revascularization?&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20cardiology&rft.au=Spadaccio,%20Cristiano&rft.date=2016-12-01&rft.volume=224&rft.spage=295&rft.epage=298&rft.pages=295-298&rft.issn=0167-5273&rft.eissn=1874-1754&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.09.055&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1835523099%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1835523099&rft_id=info:pmid/27665400&rft_els_id=S0167527316323117&rfr_iscdi=true |