ISCHEMIA Trial and the Significance of MI
During the past decade, the treatment of choice for chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) has been a contentious issue. Whether revascularisation, either percutaneous or surgical, or optimal medical therapy, offers better prognosis in terms of mortality, MI, and symptom relief, has yet to be confirmed. T...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Radcliffe Medical Media
2020
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/27f8c08c55f44a4e92f157da82c56f8d |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | During the past decade, the treatment of choice for chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) has been a contentious issue. Whether revascularisation, either percutaneous or surgical, or optimal medical therapy, offers better prognosis in terms of mortality, MI, and symptom relief, has yet to be confirmed. The long-awaited and recently published International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA) trial randomised more than 5,000 patients into a revascularisation plus optimal medical therapy group and an optimal medical therapy alone group. The authors analyse the trial, with particular emphasis on the incidence of MI. They propose a patient-centred approach to incorporate the results of the ISCHEMIA trial into daily practice and determine the best treatment strategy for patients with CCS. |
|---|