Abstract
Coronary angiography and revascularization began in the 1960s and has evolved dramatically into a robust platform for not only diagnosis of coronary disease but also complex intervention. The phenomenal number of procedures, over a million by the mid-2000s in the United States alone, has helped improve operator expertise. This coupled with advances in equipment, specifically in stent technology, has made percutaneous intervention an increasingly preferred modality in various clinical scenarios. With this, the world saw ever-increasing revascularization of coronary stenoses in patients ranging from those with asymptomatic lesions to those suffering an acute myocardial infarction. However, even though coronary intervention through both percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting have greatly improved outcomes in the setting of acute coronary syndrome, the same has not been systematically true for stable ischemic heart disease.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Rosamond W, Flegal K, Friday G, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2007 update. Circulation. 2007;115:e69–e171.
ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention—summary article. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (ACC/AHA/SCAI writing committee to update the 2001 guidelines for percutaneous coronary intervention). Circulation. 2006;113:156–75.
Varnauskas E. Twelve-year follow-up of survival in the randomized European Coronary Surgery Study. N Engl J Med. 1988;319(6):332–7.
Veterans Administration Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Cooperative Study Group. Eleven-year survival in the veterans administration randomized trial of coronary bypass surgery for stable angina. N Engl J Med. 1984;311(21):1333–9.
The VA Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Cooperative Study Group. Eighteen-year survival in the veterans affairs cooperative study of coronary artery bypasss surgery for stable angina. Circulation. 1992;86(1):121–30.
Loop FD, Lytle BW, Cosgrove DM, et al. Influence of the internal-mammary-artery graft on 10-year survival and other cardiac events. N Engl J Med. 1986;314(1):1–6.
Coronary artery surgery study (CASS): a randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Comparability of entry characteristics and survival in randomized patients and nonrandomized patients meeting randomization criteria. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1984;3(1):114–28.
Yusuf S, Zucker D, Passamani E, et al. Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists Collaboration. Lancet. 1994;344:563–70.
Coronary angioplasty versus medical therapy for angina: the second Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA-2) trial. RITA-2 trial participants. Lancet. 1997;350(9076):461–8.
Pocock SJ, Henderson RA, Rickards AF, Hampton JR, et al. Meta-analysis of randomised trials comparing coronary angioplasty with bypass surgery. Lancet. 1995;346(8984):1184–9.
Roger VL, Go AS, Lloyd-Jones DM, et al. Executive summary: heart diseaseand stroke statistics-2011 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2011;123(4):459–63.
Katritsis DG, Ioannidis JP. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus conservativetherapy in nonacute coronary artery disease: a meta analysis. Circulation. 2005;111:2906–12.
Boden WE, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(15):1503–16.
Chaitman BR, Rosen AD, Williams DO, et al. Myocardial infarction and cardiac mortality in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) randomized trial. Circulation. 1997;96(7):2162–70.
Sobel BE, Frye R, Detre KM, et al. Burgeoning dilemmas in the management of diabetes and cardiovascular disease: rationale for the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation 2 diabetes (BARI 2D) trial. Circulation. 2003;107(4):636–42.
Farkouh ME, Domanski M, Sleeper LA, et al. Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:2375–84.
Park SJ, Ahn JM, Kim YH, et al. Trial of everolimus-eluting stents or bypass surgery for coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1204–12.
Farooq V, et al. Quantification of incomplete revacularization and its association with five year mortality in the synergy between percutaneous cornary intervention with taxus and cardiac surgery (SYNTAX) trial validation of residual SYNTAX score. Circulation. 2013;128:141–51.
Xu B, Yang YJ, Han YL, et al. Validation of residual SYNTAX score with second-generation drug-eluting stents: one-year results from the prospective multicentre SEEDS study. EuroIntervention. 2014;10(1):65–73.
Garcia S, et al. Outcomse after complete versus incomplete revascularization of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of 89, 883 patients enrolled in randomized clinical trials and obervational studies. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:1421–31.
Aggarwal V, et al. Clinical outcomes based on completeness of revascularisation in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis of multivessel coronary artery disease studies. EuroIntervention. 2012;7:1095–102.
Escaned J, Banning A, Farooq V, et al. Rationale and design of the SYNTAX II trial evaluating the short to long-term outcomes of state-of-the-art percutaneous coronary revascularisation in patients with de novo three-vessel disease. EuroIntervention. 2016;12(2):e224–34.
Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Maron DJ, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention to reduce ischemic burden: results from the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) trial nuclear substudy. Circulation. 2008;117(10):1283–91.
Tonino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(3):213–24.
Sechtem U. Is FAME 2 a breakthrough for PCI in stable coronary disease? Clin Res Cardiol. 2015;104(4):283–7.
Al-Lamee R, Thompson D, Dehbi H-M, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention in stable angina (ORBITA): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2018;391:31–40.
Al-Lamee R, Howard J, Shun-Shin M, et al. Fractional flow reserve and instantaneous wave-free ratio as predictors of the placebo-controlled response to percutaneous coronary intervention in stable single vessel coronary artery disease: the physiology-stratified analysis of ORBITA. Circulation. 2018. doi:https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.033801 [Epub ahead of print].
Kirtane AJ. ORBITA: bringing some oxygen back to pci in stable ischemic heart disease? Circulation. CIRCULATIONAHA.118.035331.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Weintraub, W.S., Weiss, S., Bikak, A.L. (2018). Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Stable Ischemic Heart Disease. In: Myat, A., Clarke, S., Curzen, N., Windecker, S., Gurbel, P.A. (eds) The Interventional Cardiology Training Manual. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71635-0_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71635-0_18
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-71633-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-71635-0
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)