z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
ORBITA: What Goes Around, Comes Around… Or Does It?
Author(s) -
Matthew Jackson,
Azfar Zaman
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
interventional cardiology reviews research resources
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.832
H-Index - 11
eISSN - 1756-1477
pISSN - 1756-1485
DOI - 10.15420/icr.2018.18.2
Subject(s) - medicine , conventional pci , percutaneous coronary intervention , coronary artery disease , cardiology , myocardial infarction , unstable angina , placebo , angina , population , medical therapy , clinical trial , alternative medicine , environmental health , pathology
Current guidelines recommend percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ongoing stable angina symptoms despite optimal medical therapy (OMT), although trials have shown no reduction in death or myocardial infarction. The recently published ORBITA trial compared OMT + PCI with OMT + 'placebo' PCI in patients with angina and single-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD), and found no significant difference in treadmill exercise time between the two groups after six weeks. The trial concluded that invasive procedures can be assessed with placebo control while numerous editorials interpreted the trial as showing that PCI has no role in the management of stable angina. However, the highly selected patient population, low ischaemic burden and level of symptoms and high proportion of non-flow-limiting stenoses on invasive physiological testing mean that, while ground-breaking in terms of its methodology, ORBITA does not add to the current evidence base supporting ischaemia-guided revascularisation if symptoms are not controlled on medical therapy alone.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom