Abstract
The evidence base evaluating the use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices in complex, high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention is evolving from a small number of randomised clinical trials to incorporate an amassing body of real-world data. Due to both the growing incidence of the procedures and the limitations of the evidence, there is wide variability in the use of MCS, and the benefits are actively debated. The goal of this review is to perform an integrated analysis of randomised and non-randomised studies which have informed clinical and regulatory decision-making in contemporary clinical practice. In addition, we describe forthcoming studies that have been specifically designed to advance the field and resolve ongoing controversies that remain unanswered for this complex, high-risk patient population.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call