Did the ISCHEMIA Trial Change the Path to Cath in Stable Coronary Artery Disease?

This transcript has been edited for clarity.

Michelle L. O'Donoghue, MD, MPH: Hi. I'm Dr Michelle O'Donoghue reporting for Medscape. Joining me today are two interventional cardiologists with whom I've had the pleasure of speaking with in the past. We're doing a sequel, so to speak, to a prior conversation that we've had about the results of ISCHEMIA.

Joining me today are Dr Rasha Al-Lamee, from Imperial College in London, and Dr Jacqueline Tamis-Holland, from Mount Sinai in New York. Welcome, both of you. Thank you for joining us today.

To bring everyone up to speed, it's obviously been a rapidly evolving field, as we've had different trials along the way that have helped to build the evidence base that we now have. We've had COURAGE; Rasha, you've led the effort on ORBITA; and we've also had ISCHEMIA. We'll talk about where we are now, but Rasha would you remind everyone how the field has been set?

Studies on Revascularization in Stable Coronary Artery Disease

Rasha Al-Lamee, MBBS, MA, PhD: Thank you very much, Michelle. I think the stable coronary artery diseasebase has really changed over the last decade or two. It obviously started with COURAGE, which first shocked the world by telling us that in patients with stable coronary artery disease, we didn't need to rush them to revascularization, and that in fact, the outcomes for optimal medical therapy vs