<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

<p>The management of patients with coronary artery disease and heart failure has been debated for years. In the 1980’s Braunwald coined the words “viability” and “stunning”. Multiple trials have been done since then. Since the early eighties coronary bypass grafting was considered as gold standard for patients with impaired left ventricular fraction and coronary artery disease. Since then, nuclear imaging studies have been used to evaluate the “viability” of the impaired areas and to decide if revascularisation would be reasonable. Beginning with the CASS study and ending with the more recent STICH study we aim to provide a “bird’s eye view” of the pros and cons for revascularisation. In addition, we aim to shed some light on the daily advancements in medical management, including devices and not just medication. We therefore chose the title “Back to the future” or maybe not.</p>
</abstract>

The management of patients with coronary artery disease and heart failure has been debated for years. In the 1980’s Braunwald coined the words “viability” and “stunning”. Multiple trials have been done since then. Since the early eighties coronary bypass grafting was considered as gold standard for patients with impaired left ventricular fraction and coronary artery disease. Since then, nuclear imaging studies have been used to evaluate the “viability” of the impaired areas and to decide if revascularisation would be reasonable. Beginning with the CASS study and ending with the more recent STICH study we aim to provide a “bird’s eye view” of the pros and cons for revascularisation. In addition, we aim to shed some light on the daily advancements in medical management, including devices and not just medication. We therefore chose the title “Back to the future” or maybe not.

Controversy: Critical Review of the Stich Trial and Assessment of Viability. “Back to the Future” Or Maybe Not

Acta Medica Bulgarica

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

The management of patients with coronary artery disease and heart failure has been debated for years. In the 1980’s Braunwald coined the words “viability” and...

Controversy: Critical Review of the Stich Trial and Assessment of Viability. “Back to the Future” Or Maybe Not

Online veröffentlicht: 22. Apr. 2022

Seitenbereich: 63 - 68

Eingereicht: 10. März 2022

Akzeptiert: 30. März 2022

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amb-2022-0011

Schlüsselwörter
viability, heart failure, coronary artery disease, systolic volume, nuclear medicine, revascularisation

© 2022 V. Grigorov et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Controversy: Critical Review of the Stich Trial and Assessment of Viability. “Back to the Future” Or Maybe Not

Online veröffentlicht: 22. Apr. 2022

Seitenbereich: 63 - 68

Eingereicht: 10. März 2022

Akzeptiert: 30. März 2022

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/amb-2022-0011

Schlüsselwörterviability, heart failure, coronary artery disease, systolic volume, nuclear medicine, revascularisation

© 2022 V. Grigorov et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Schlüsselwörter
viability, heart failure, coronary artery disease, systolic volume, nuclear medicine, revascularisation