Guidelines for revascularization: The evidence base matures

Clicks: 471
ID: 56612
2012
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Myocardial revascularization procedures continue to represent important treatment options for patients with acute and chronic coronary artery disease (CAD) and also represent a major source of health care expenditures. For the past decade, the indications for revascularization in patients with chronic CAD, and the indications for surgical versus percutaneous revascularization, have been the subject of considerable discussion, debate, and controversy. The guidelines from the American College of Cardiology Foundation / American Heart Association (ACCF/AHA) and the European Society of Cardiology / European Association for Cardiothoracic S (ESC/EACTS) have made major inroads in resolving these issues and have provided the standards for care for interventional cardiologists, surgeons, and the physicians who refer patients for these procedures. The transatlantic guidelines have also been remarkably concordant in their overall recommendations.
Reference Key
bonow2012guidelinesglobal Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Bonow, Robert O.;
Journal global cardiology science & practice
Year 2012
DOI
DOI not found
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.