| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type | 
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3799128 | Medicina Clínica | 2009 | 7 Pages | 
Abstract
												Revascularization strategy in the setting of non-ST-segment acute coronary syndromes remains a controversy. Evidence obtained from clinical trials, generally performed in selected patients, reveals heterogeneous and insufficient results when a routine invasive revascularization strategy and a conservative one are compared. The conflicting results among trials are due to differences in: a) baseline characteristics; b) methodology and protocols applied and; c) objectives and outcomes definitions. Although present guidelines recommend that a routine invasive strategy should be used in high risk non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes, there is no consistent evidence that supports this approach. In order to reach definitive conclusions, further randomized studies should: a) expand inclusion criteria to highest risk populations and; b) standardize the methodology, objectives and outcome definitions.
											Keywords
												
											Related Topics
												
													Health Sciences
													Medicine and Dentistry
													Medicine and Dentistry (General)
												
											Authors
												Julio Núñez, Juan Sanchis, Vicent BodÃ, 
											