1. The ORBITA trial: a point of view
- Author
-
Vitor Dornela de Oliveira, Eduardo Gomes Lima, Carlos Vicente Serrano Junior, Fernando Rabioglio Giugni, E B Martins, and D F C Azevedo
- Subjects
medicine.medical_specialty ,medicine.medical_treatment ,Population ,education ,MEDLINE ,Coronary Artery Disease ,030204 cardiovascular system & hematology ,Placebo ,Revascularization ,Angina ,Coronary artery disease ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ,Angioplasty ,medicine ,030212 general & internal medicine ,Intensive care medicine ,education.field_of_study ,lcsh:R5-920 ,business.industry ,Percutaneous coronary intervention ,General Medicine ,medicine.disease ,INFARTO DO MIOCÁRDIO ,Stents ,Stable Angina ,business ,lcsh:Medicine (General) - Abstract
Summary Treatment of stable coronary artery disease (CAD) relies on improved prognosis and relief of symptoms. National and international guidelines on CAD support the indication for revascularization in patients with limiting symptoms and refractory to drug treatment. Previous studies attested the efficacy of angioplasty to improve angina as well as the functional capacity of patients with symptomatic stable CAD. The ORBITA trial, recently published in an international journal, showed no benefit in terms of exercise tolerance compared to a placebo procedure in a population of single-vessel patients undergoing contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention. In this point of view article, the authors discuss the ORBITA trial regarding methodological issues, limitations and clinical applicability.
- Published
- 2018