Illusion of revascularization: does anyone achieve optimal revascularization during percutaneous coronary intervention?

Abstract

This Perspective article is a form of ‘pastiche’, inspired by the 1993 review by Lincoff and Topol entitled ‘Illusion of reperfusion’, and explores how their concept continues to apply to percutaneous revascularization in patients with coronary artery disease and ischaemia. Just as Lincoff and Topol argued that reperfusion of acute myocardial infarction was facing unresolved obstacles that hampered clinical success in 1993, we propose that challenging issues are similarly jeopardizing the potential benefits of stent-based angioplasty today. By analysing the appropriateness and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), we emphasize the limitations of relying solely on visual angiographic guidance, which frequently leads to inappropriate stenting and overtreatment in up to one-third of patients and the associated increased risk of periprocedural myocardial infarction. The lack of optimal revascularization observed in half of patients undergoing PCI confers risks such as suboptimal physiology after PCI, residual angina and long-term stent-related events, leaving an estimated 76% of patients with an ‘illusion of revascularization’. These outcomes highlight the need to refine our diagnostic tools by integrating physiological assessments with targeted intracoronary imaging and emerging strategies, such as co-registration systems and angiography-based computational methods enhanced by artificial intelligence, to achieve optimal revascularization outcomes.