- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting for Severe Coronary Artery Disease
new england journal 2009;360:961-972
- ACC/AHA 2006 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease Circulation 2006;114;450-527
Executive Summary A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1998 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease) Developed in Collaboration With the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists Endorsed by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons
- ACC/AHA 2004 Guideline Update for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Circulation 2004;110;e340-e437
- "Prevention of Infective Endocarditis" Circulation 2007;116;1736-1754;
Guidelines From the American Heart Association A Guideline From the American Heart Association Rheumatic Fever, Endocarditis, and Kawasaki Disease Committee, Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young, and the Council on Clinical Cardiology, Council on Cardiovascular Surgery and Anesthesia, and the Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Interdisciplinary Working Group Walter Wilson, MD, Chair; Kathryn A. Taubert, PhD, FAHA; Michael Gewitz, MD, FAHA; Peter B. Lockhart, DDS; Larry M. Baddour, MD; Matthew Levison, MD; Ann Bolger, MD, FAHA; Christopher H. Cabell, MD, MHS; Masato Takahashi, MD, FAHA; Robert S. Baltimore, MD; Jane W. Newburger, MD, MPH, FAHA; Brian L. Strom, MD; Lloyd Y. Tani, MD; Michael Gerber, MD; Robert O. Bonow, MD, FAHA; Thomas Pallasch, DDS, MS; Stanford T. Shulman, MD, FAHA; Anne H. Rowley, MD; Jane C. Burns, MD; Patricia Ferrieri, MD; Timothy Gardner, MD, FAHA; David Goff, MD, PhD, FAHA; David T. Durack, MD, PhD The Council on Scientific Affairs of the American Dental Association has approved the guideline as it relates to dentistry. In addition, this guideline has been endorsed by the American Academy of Pediatrics, Infectious Diseases Society of America, the International Society of Chemotherapy for Infection and Cancer,* and the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society.
- "Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS)" Circulation. 1983;68:939-950
Abstract: CASS includes a multicenter patient registry and a randomized controlled clinical trial. It is designed to assess the effect of coronary artery bypass surgery on mortality and selected nonfatal end points. From August 1975 to May 1979, 780 patients with stable ischemic heart disease were randomly assigned to receive surgical (n = 390) or nonsurgical (n = 390) treatment and were followed through April 15, 1983. At 5 years, the average annual mortality rate in patients assigned to surgical treatment was 1.1%. The annual mortality rate in those receiving medical therapy was 1.6%. Annual mortality rates in patients with single-, double-, and triple-vessel disease who were in the surgical group were 0.7%, 1.0%, and 1.5%; the corresponding rates in patients in the medical group were 1.4%, 1.2%, and 2.1%. The differences were not statistically significant. Nearly 75% of the patients had entry ejection fractions of at least 0.50. The annual mortality rates in patients in the surgical group in this subgroup with single-, double-, and triple-vessel disease were 0.8%, 0.8%, and 1.2% and corresponding rates in the medical group were 1.1%, 0.6%, and 1.2%. The annual rate of bypass surgery in patients who were initially assigned to receive medical treatment was 4.7%. The excellent survival rates observed both in CASS patients assigned to receive medical and those assigned to receive surgical therapy and the similarity of survival rates in the two groups of patients in this randomized trial lead to the conclusion that patients similar to those enrolled in this trial can safely defer bypass surgery until symptoms worsen to the point that surgical palliation is required.
Ann Thorac Surg 2008;85:S737-S742. doi:10.1016/j.athoracsur.2007.11.047
Clinical and pathologic staging of lung cancer is suboptimal in achieving the goals of assessing prognosis and selecting therapy. Although the technologic developments that allow the generalized use of proteomic and genomic analyses are relatively recent, major progress in understanding the molecular basis of lung cancer has been made. Predicting survival is only the first step in the use of genomics and proteomics. If a reliable gene array or protein profile can be identified that is associated with poor prognosis, these profiles can then be identified and become potential therapeutic targets. It is not difficult to envision the development of a simple serum test that will diagnose a lung cancer perhaps even before it is clinically apparent and at the same time identify the chemotherapeutic agents to which the tumor is sensitive, allowing individually directed treatment. Eventually, a comprehensive staging system should incorporate the prognostic information of biologic variables.
- "The MARS trial: mesothelioma and radical surgery" Interact CardioVasc Thorac Surg 2006;5:58-59.