English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Prior studies have shown that routine follow-up coronary angiography (CAG) following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) increases the incidence of revascularization without a clear reduction in major adverse clinical events. However, none of these prior studies were adequately powered to evaluate hard clinical endpoints such as myocardial infarction (MI) or death and thus the clinical utility of such practice remains to be determined.Methods and Results:We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials that compared clinical outcomes after PCI between patients who underwent routine follow-up CAG and those who only had clinical follow-up. Five randomized trials, totaling 4,584 patients met our inclusion criteria, including studies that used sub-randomization and ones that assigned consecutive patients per study protocol. Our results showed that routine follow-up CAG was associated with a lower rate of MI (odds ratio [OR] 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46-0.91; P=0.01) without reduction in all-cause mortality (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.59-1.28; P=0.48), and a higher rate of target lesion revascularization (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.42-2.11; P&lt;0.001).

Role of Routine Follow-up Coronary Angiography After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ― Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis ―