The EXCEL Trial: The Surgeons' Perspective.

IF 3.2 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
European Cardiology Review Pub Date : 2020-11-09 eCollection Date: 2020-02-01 DOI:10.15420/ecr.2020.34
Marjan Jahangiri, Krishna Mani, Martin T Yates, Justin Nowell
{"title":"The EXCEL Trial: The Surgeons' Perspective.","authors":"Marjan Jahangiri, Krishna Mani, Martin T Yates, Justin Nowell","doi":"10.15420/ecr.2020.34","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There have been several investigations comparing the efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting surgery for treatment of left main stem disease. This includes the Evaluation of XIENCE versus Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularizaton (EXCEL) trial, which has garnered significant controversy surrounding its experimental design and reporting of its results. The authors review the methodology, results, caveats and statements on the EXCEL trial. They also review the other trials in the management of left main stem disease comparing percutaneous coronary intervention with coronary artery bypass grafting, as well as the SYNTAX score and its role in future guidelines for revascularisation. These findings have significant implications for current practice, influencing the growing role for multidisciplinary team meeting and allowing clinicians and patients to make the right choice.</p>","PeriodicalId":45957,"journal":{"name":"European Cardiology Review","volume":"15 ","pages":"e67"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/8d/a6/ecr-15-e67.PMC7689871.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Cardiology Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15420/ecr.2020.34","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There have been several investigations comparing the efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting surgery for treatment of left main stem disease. This includes the Evaluation of XIENCE versus Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularizaton (EXCEL) trial, which has garnered significant controversy surrounding its experimental design and reporting of its results. The authors review the methodology, results, caveats and statements on the EXCEL trial. They also review the other trials in the management of left main stem disease comparing percutaneous coronary intervention with coronary artery bypass grafting, as well as the SYNTAX score and its role in future guidelines for revascularisation. These findings have significant implications for current practice, influencing the growing role for multidisciplinary team meeting and allowing clinicians and patients to make the right choice.

EXCEL 试验:外科医生的视角。
有几项研究比较了经皮冠状动脉介入治疗和冠状动脉旁路移植手术治疗左主干疾病的疗效。其中包括 "XIENCE与冠状动脉旁路移植手术对左主干血管重建有效性的评估"(EXCEL)试验,该试验在实验设计和结果报告方面引起了很大争议。作者回顾了 EXCEL 试验的方法、结果、注意事项和声明。他们还回顾了经皮冠状动脉介入治疗与冠状动脉搭桥术在左主干疾病治疗中的其他试验比较,以及SYNTAX评分及其在未来血管重建指南中的作用。这些研究结果对当前的实践具有重要意义,影响了多学科团队会议日益增长的作用,使临床医生和患者能够做出正确的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Cardiology Review
European Cardiology Review CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信