Health-Status Outcomes with Invasive or Conservative Care in Coronary Disease.
John A SpertusPhilip G JonesDavid J MaronSean M O'BrienHarmony R ReynoldsYves RosenbergGregg W StoneFrank E HarrellWilliam E BodenWilliam S WeintraubKhaula BalochKreton MavromatisAriel DiazGilbert GosselinJonathan D NewmanStavroula MavromichalisKaren P AlexanderDavid J CohenSripal BangaloreJudith S HochmanDaniel B Marknull nullPublished in: The New England journal of medicine (2020)
In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01471522.).
Keyphrases
- end stage renal disease
- coronary artery disease
- coronary artery
- ejection fraction
- newly diagnosed
- chronic kidney disease
- healthcare
- percutaneous coronary intervention
- prognostic factors
- heart failure
- peritoneal dialysis
- palliative care
- randomized controlled trial
- quality improvement
- adipose tissue
- study protocol
- atrial fibrillation
- phase iii
- chronic pain
- transcatheter aortic valve replacement