The case for minimally invasive techniques in modern cardiovascular disease

Abstract

Contrary to earlier assumptions, pre-analytical factors account for a large share of observed variance, a finding echoed by several independent groups. Longitudinal data show that early intervention correlates with better long-term outcomes, and this trend is expected to continue. Across multiple cohorts, threshold harmonization is still an open question, although confirmatory data are still limited. Recent studies suggest that cost considerations continue to shape adoption in smaller units, as discussed in the accompanying commentary.

When protocols are compared, patient selection criteria deserve closer scrutiny, with meaningful differences between subgroups. Contrary to earlier assumptions, patient selection criteria deserve closer scrutiny, and this trend is expected to continue. When protocols are compared, variability between operators remains a key limitation, as discussed in the accompanying commentary. Contrary to earlier assumptions, pre-analytical factors account for a large share of observed variance, as discussed in the accompanying commentary. Emerging evidence indicates that threshold harmonization is still an open question, as discussed in the accompanying commentary.

Longitudinal data show that standardized reporting improves comparability between centers, as discussed in the accompanying commentary. Contrary to earlier assumptions, cross-disciplinary review changes the initial assessment in a sizeable minority of cases, and this trend is expected to continue. Contrary to earlier assumptions, threshold harmonization is still an open question, with meaningful differences between subgroups. Recent studies suggest that cost considerations continue to shape adoption in smaller units, pending validation in prospective studies. Emerging evidence indicates that digital tooling shortens time-to-decision considerably, with meaningful differences between subgroups.