Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Should Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Be Considered for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease?

Should Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Be Considered for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease? Research Original Investigation Characteristics of RCTs and their Association With Trial Funding in Invasive Cardiovascular Interventions Invited Commentary Should Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Be Considered for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease? Insights From a Bayesian Reanalysis of the EXCEL Trial Sanjay Kaul, MD In this issue of JAMA Internal Medicine, Brophy presents a invasive cardiovascular interventions. Only a median of 5 pa- bayesian analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing re- tients experiencing a different outcome would change statis- vascularization strategies for treatment of left main coronary tically significant results to nonsignificant. artery disease (LMCAD). This article is important because of In the EXCEL trial, the definition of MI was biased in the recent publication of the favor of PCI because it used a less stringent criterion of pre- 5-year results of the EXCEL dominantly biomarker elevation instead of the more strin- Author Audio Interview (Evaluation of XIENCE Ver- gent requirement of new Q waves observed on electrocardio- sus Coronary Artery Bypass grams plus biomarker elevation that has been used in most Related articles pages 986 Surgery for Effectiveness of comparable trials. This different definition of MI explains and 993 Left Main Revascularization) why 5-year MI rates in the CABG arm http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA Internal Medicine American Medical Association

Should Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Be Considered for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease?

JAMA Internal Medicine , Volume 180 (7) – Jul 1, 2020

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/should-percutaneous-coronary-intervention-be-considered-for-left-main-dBA2jchne2
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright 2020 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
2168-6106
eISSN
2168-6114
DOI
10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.1644
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Research Original Investigation Characteristics of RCTs and their Association With Trial Funding in Invasive Cardiovascular Interventions Invited Commentary Should Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Be Considered for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease? Insights From a Bayesian Reanalysis of the EXCEL Trial Sanjay Kaul, MD In this issue of JAMA Internal Medicine, Brophy presents a invasive cardiovascular interventions. Only a median of 5 pa- bayesian analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing re- tients experiencing a different outcome would change statis- vascularization strategies for treatment of left main coronary tically significant results to nonsignificant. artery disease (LMCAD). This article is important because of In the EXCEL trial, the definition of MI was biased in the recent publication of the favor of PCI because it used a less stringent criterion of pre- 5-year results of the EXCEL dominantly biomarker elevation instead of the more strin- Author Audio Interview (Evaluation of XIENCE Ver- gent requirement of new Q waves observed on electrocardio- sus Coronary Artery Bypass grams plus biomarker elevation that has been used in most Related articles pages 986 Surgery for Effectiveness of comparable trials. This different definition of MI explains and 993 Left Main Revascularization) why 5-year MI rates in the CABG arm

Journal

JAMA Internal MedicineAmerican Medical Association

Published: Jul 1, 2020

References