Dataset Information

Can Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Revive a Failing Heart?

ABSTRACT: Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains the most common cause of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; despite its prevalence, there is limited evidence to guide physicians in managing patients with CAD with percutaneous revascularization. The REVIVED-BCIS2 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01920048) represents the first randomized trial to assess the value of percutaneous coronary intervention in addition to optimal medical therapy in patients with ischaemic left ventricular systolic dysfunction and stable CAD. In this article, we review the results of the REVIVED-BCIS2 trial and compare them to the ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00023595 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00023595), which investigated the benefit of surgical revascularization on such patients. Finally, we suggest a pathway for physicians managing patients with ischaemic left ventricular systolic dysfunction based on the current evidence and highlight potential avenues for future research.

SUBMITTER: Ezad SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9872779 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Can Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Revive a Failing Heart?

Ezad Saad M SM Ryan Matthew M Perera Divaka D

Heart international 20221221 2

Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains the most common cause of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; despite its prevalence, there is limited evidence to guide physicians in managing patients with CAD with percutaneous revascularization. The REVIVED-BCIS2 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01920048) represents the first randomized trial to assess the value of percutaneous coronary intervention in addition to optimal medical therapy in patients with ischaemic left ventricular systol ...[more]

PMID: 36741102

Similar Datasets

Project description:ContextDespite the widespread use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the appropriateness of these procedures in contemporary practice is unknown.ObjectiveTo assess the appropriateness of PCI in the United States.Design, setting, and patientsMulticenter, prospective study of patients within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry undergoing PCI between July 1, 2009, and September 30, 2010, at 1091 US hospitals. The appropriateness of PCI was adjudicated using the appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization. Results were stratified by whether the procedure was performed for an acute (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, or unstable angina with high-risk features) or nonacute indication.Main outcome measuresProportion of acute and nonacute PCIs classified as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate; extent of hospital-level variation in inappropriate procedures.ResultsOf 500,154 PCIs, 355,417 (71.1%) were for acute indications (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 103,245 [20.6%]; non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 105,708 [21.1%]; high-risk unstable angina, 146,464 [29.3%]), and 144,737 (28.9%) for nonacute indications. For acute indications, 350,469 PCIs (98.6%) were classified as appropriate, 1055 (0.3%) as uncertain, and 3893 (1.1%) as inappropriate. For nonacute indications, 72,911 PCIs (50.4%) were classified as appropriate, 54,988 (38.0%) as uncertain, and 16,838 (11.6%) as inappropriate. The majority of inappropriate PCIs for nonacute indications were performed in patients with no angina (53.8%), low-risk ischemia on noninvasive stress testing (71.6%), or suboptimal (≤1 medication) antianginal therapy (95.8%). Furthermore, although variation in the proportion of inappropriate PCI across hospitals was minimal for acute procedures, there was substantial hospital variation for nonacute procedures (median hospital rate for inappropriate PCI, 10.8%; interquartile range, 6.0%-16.7%).ConclusionsIn this large contemporary US cohort, nearly all acute PCIs were classified as appropriate. For nonacute indications, however, 12% were classified as inappropriate, with substantial variation across hospitals.

Dataset Information

Can Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Revive a Failing Heart?

Publications

Can Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Revive a Failing Heart?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets