Document resource
In patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is indicated in high-risk individuals to improve symptoms and prevent adverse events,1 with the largest benefits being denoted among patients achieving functional or anatomical complete revascularisation.2 However, the relative benefits of PCI on long-term hard clinical outcomes have been challenged by the neutral results of the International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches Trial, where no significant differences between early invasive management and conservative management were detected among 5179 patients with chronic coronary syndrome and moderate-to-severe ischaemia,3 questioning whether the benefit of PCI are only limited to patients with acute myocardial infarction and symptom control.