Revascularization in stable coronary disease: evidence and uncertainties
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 11, 2026

Novel Percutaneous Approach for Deployment of 3D Printed Coronary Stenosis Implants in Swine Models of Ischemic Heart Disease
Published on: February 18, 2020
Demosthenes G Katritsis1, Daniel B Mark2, Bernard J Gersh3
1Department of Cardiology, Hygeia Hospital, Athens, Greece. dkatrits@dgkatritsis.gr.
Insights
Revascularization for stable coronary artery disease (CAD) relies on outdated evidence. This review examines current decision-making factors and compares coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Interventional Cardiology
- Cardiovascular Surgery
Background:
- Revascularization is a key treatment for obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD).
- Evidence supporting revascularization for stable CAD is limited, predating modern optimal medical therapy and revascularization techniques.
- Existing clinical trials, though outdated, still inform current guidelines for stable CAD.
Purpose of the Study:
- To discuss factors influencing the decision for revascularization in stable CAD.
- To examine the evidence and limitations for revascularization in stable CAD.
- To compare coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
Main Methods:
- Review of existing clinical trial evidence.
- Analysis of contemporary standards for optimal medical therapy.
- Evaluation of current revascularization techniques and technologies.
Main Results:
- Evidence for stable CAD is less robust than for acute coronary syndromes.
- Contemporary optimal medical therapy and revascularization techniques have evolved significantly.
- Guideline indications for stable CAD are based on foundational, albeit dated, clinical trials.
Conclusions:
- The decision for revascularization in stable CAD requires careful consideration of outdated evidence and modern therapeutic advancements.
- A critical evaluation of existing data is necessary to guide the choice between CABG and PCI.
- Further research may be needed to align evidence with current clinical practice for stable CAD management.
Abstract:
Although revascularization has been one of the primary treatment options for obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) for about 50 years, the evidence base for its use is most robust in the area of acute coronary disease. By contrast, evidence - particularly from clinical trials - supporting the use of revascularization to improve clinical outcomes in stable CAD is in some important respects outdated in that it reflects therapies that predate both contemporary standards for optimal medical therapy and current revascularization techniques and technologies. Despite such limitations, these clinical trials still provide the foundation for many of the current guideline-based indications for coronary revascularization in patients with stable CAD. In this Review, we discuss the major factors underlying the clinical decision to perform revascularization in patients with stable CAD and examine the use and limitations of existing evidence on the choice for, and preferred methods of, revascularization, namely, CABG surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
The Uncertainty Principle
Coronary Artery Disease I: Introduction
The Evidence for Evolution
Coronary Artery Disease II: Pathophysiology
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Uncertainty in Measurement: Reading Instruments

