LAUSR

PURPOSE OF REVIEW The purpose of this review is to summarize landmark studies and recent evidence in support for and against benefits of routine percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). RECENT FINDINGS Randomized controlled trials have raised uncertainty regarding the prognostic benefits of routine PCI in patients with SIHD. The benefits of PCI to improve symptoms and quality of life (QOL), thought to be more established, was brought into question recently by the ORBITA trial. Two hundred participants with single vessel SIHD optimized first on antianginal therapy were randomized to PCI or sham PCI procedure. At 6 weeks, there was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of exercise time increment (PCI minus sham PCI 16.6 s, 95% confidence interval -8.9 to 42.0 s, P = 0.20), or secondary endpoints of change in angina or QOL scores between the groups. SUMMARY Findings from this first placebo-controlled trial of PCI in patients with single vessel SIHD suggest that PCI need not necessarily be the first line or default strategy for symptomatic improvement. Results from the ongoing ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial will provide further guidance regarding symptomatic and prognostic benefits of early angiography and revascularization for higher risk SIHD patients with moderate-severe ischemia.