Coronary Artery Disease

ORBITA: What Goes Around, Comes Around… Or Does It?

Medical therapy has been the primary treatment for stable angina since nitroglycerin was first used in 1878. However, since the first successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedure was performed in 1977, the role of PCI in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) has been the subject of much study. Numerous trials have shown no reduction in death or myocardial infarction.1–5 However, these trials suggest that PCI is maybe more effective for managing angina symptoms than medical therapy alone.

Culprit Vessel Only Versus Complete Revascularisation in Patients with ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction – Should we Stay or Stage?

For ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), there is currently no doubt that primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) of the infarct related artery (IRA) is the preferred reperfusion strategy.1 In about 50 % of cases, STEMI is associated with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD), defined as a ≥50 % stenosis in at least one non-infarct related epicardial coronary artery (N-IRA, Figure 1).2,3 Like many other facto

Effect of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Heart Rate Variability in Coronary Artery Disease Patients

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the most common cause of morbidity and premature mortality globally,1 and cardiac autonomic dysfunction is one of the risk factors for CAD.2 Heart rate variability (HRV) is the physiological phenomenon of variation in the time interval between heartbeats and is one of the most promising non-invasive diagnostic methods for assessing autonomic dysfunction.