Chronic stable coronary artery disease: drugs vs. revascularization
Open Access
- 26 January 2010
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in European Heart Journal
- Vol. 31 (5), 530-541
- https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehp605
Abstract
Coronary artery disease remains the leading cause of mortality in most industrialized countries, although age-standardized mortality related to coronary artery disease (CAD) has decreased by more than 40% during the last two decades. Coronary atherosclerosis may cause angina pectoris, myocardial infarction, heart failure, arrhythmia, and sudden death. Medical management of atherosclerosis and its manifestation aims at retardation of progression of plaque formation, prevention of plaque rupture, and subsequent events and treatment of symptoms, when these occur as well as treatment of the sequelae of the disease. Revascularization by either percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) is performed as treatment of flow-limiting coronary stenosis to reduce myocardial ischaemia. In high-risk patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS), a routine invasive strategy with revascularization in most patients provides the best outcome with a significant reduction in death and myocardial infarction compared with an initial conservative strategy. Conversely, the benefit of revascularization among patients with chronic stable CAD has been called into question. This review will provide information that revascularization exerts favourable effects on symptoms, quality of life, exercise capacity, and survival, particularly in those with extensive CAD and documented moderate-to-severe ischaemia. Accordingly, CABG and PCI should be considered a valuable adjunct rather than an alternative to medical therapy.This publication has 100 references indexed in Scilit:
- A Randomized Trial of Therapies for Type 2 Diabetes and Coronary Artery DiseaseThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Percutaneous coronary interventions for non-acute coronary artery disease: a quantitative 20-year synopsis and a network meta-analysisThe Lancet, 2009
- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting for Severe Coronary Artery DiseaseThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Intensive Blood Glucose Control and Vascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 DiabetesThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2008
- ACC/AHA 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non–ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non–ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) Developed in Collaboration with the American College of Emergency Physicians, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Endorsed by the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Society for Academic Emergency MedicineJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2007
- Coronary Intervention for Persistent Occlusion after Myocardial InfarctionThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2006
- Paradoxical Vasoconstriction Induced by Acetylcholine in Atherosclerotic Coronary ArteriesThe New England Journal of Medicine, 1986
- Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: An overview of the randomized trialsProgress in Cardiovascular Diseases, 1985
- Myocardial Infarction and Mortality in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) Randomized TrialThe New England Journal of Medicine, 1984
- Coronary Bypass for Stable AnginaThe New England Journal of Medicine, 1979