Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 23, 2025

Coronary Progenitor Cells and Soluble Biomarkers in Cardiovascular Prognosis after Coronary Angioplasty
Published on: January 28, 2020
Survival After Invasive or Conservative Management of Stable Coronary Disease
Judith S Hochman1, Rebecca Anthopolos1, Harmony R Reynolds1
1NYU Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY (J.S.H., R.A., H.R.R., S.B., Y.X., S.M., M.C., A.C., J.D.N., J.S.B., A.B.T.).
Insights
For chronic coronary disease patients, an initial invasive strategy showed no difference in overall mortality compared to conservative care. However, it led to lower cardiovascular deaths but increased non-cardiovascular deaths over 5.7 years.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Clinical Trials
- Interventional Cardiology
Background:
- The ISCHEMIA trial investigated management strategies for chronic coronary disease with moderate to severe ischemia.
- Previous findings showed no significant differences in major outcomes between invasive and conservative approaches over 3.2 years.
Purpose of the Study:
- To report extended mortality follow-up data from the ISCHEMIA trial.
- To compare all-cause, cardiovascular, and noncardiovascular mortality between initial invasive and conservative strategies.
Main Methods:
- Randomized controlled trial comparing initial invasive vs. conservative strategies in 5179 patients.
- Extended follow-up for vital status through December 2021.
- Analysis using Cox regression and Bayesian methods, classifying undetermined deaths as cardiovascular.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in all-cause mortality at 7 years (12.7% invasive vs. 13.4% conservative).
- Lower 7-year cardiovascular mortality with invasive strategy (6.4% vs. 8.6%).
- Higher 7-year noncardiovascular mortality with invasive strategy (5.6% vs. 4.4%).
Conclusions:
- An initial invasive strategy does not alter overall mortality in chronic coronary disease patients.
- An invasive approach reduces cardiovascular mortality but increases non-cardiovascular mortality.
- No treatment effect heterogeneity observed in subgroups, including multivessel disease.
Background:
The ISCHEMIA trial (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches) compared an initial invasive versus an initial conservative management strategy for patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, with no major difference in most outcomes during a median of 3.2 years. Extended follow-up for mortality is ongoing.
Methods:
ISCHEMIA participants were randomized to an initial invasive strategy added to guideline-directed medical therapy or a conservative strategy. Patients with moderate or severe ischemia, ejection fraction ≥35%, and no recent acute coronary syndromes were included. Those with an unacceptable level of angina were excluded. Extended follow-up for vital status is being conducted by sites or through central death index search. Data obtained through December 2021 are included in this interim report. We analyzed all-cause, cardiovascular, and noncardiovascular mortality by randomized strategy, using nonparametric cumulative incidence estimators, Cox regression models, and Bayesian methods. Undetermined deaths were classified as cardiovascular as prespecified in the trial protocol.
Results:
Baseline characteristics for 5179 original ISCHEMIA trial participants included median age 65 years, 23% women, 16% Hispanic, 4% Black, 42% with diabetes, and median ejection fraction 0.60. A total of 557 deaths accrued during a median follow-up of 5.7 years, with 268 of these added in the extended follow-up phase. This included a total of 343 cardiovascular deaths, 192 noncardiovascular deaths, and 22 unclassified deaths. All-cause mortality was not different between randomized treatment groups (7-year rate, 12.7% in invasive strategy, 13.4% in conservative strategy; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.85-1.18]). There was a lower 7-year rate cardiovascular mortality (6.4% versus 8.6%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.63-0.96]) with an initial invasive strategy but a higher 7-year rate of noncardiovascular mortality (5.6% versus 4.4%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.08-1.91]) compared with the conservative strategy. No heterogeneity of treatment effect was evident in prespecified subgroups, including multivessel coronary disease.
Conclusions:
There was no difference in all-cause mortality with an initial invasive strategy compared with an initial conservative strategy, but there was lower risk of cardiovascular mortality and higher risk of noncardiovascular mortality with an initial invasive strategy during a median follow-up of 5.7 years.
Registration:
URL: https://www.
Clinicaltrials:
gov; Unique identifier: NCT04894877.
More Related Videos
05:41Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery Ligation for Ischemia-Reperfusion Research: Model Improvement via Technical Modifications and Quality Control
Published on: December 16, 2022
04:30A Murine Model of Stent Implantation in the Carotid Artery for the Study of Restenosis
Published on: May 14, 2013
Related Concept Videos
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Angina IV: Management
Angina V: Nursing Management
Mitral Stenosis III: Medical Management
Acute Coronary Syndrome V: Nursing Management