Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,449

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Initial Invasive or Conservative Strategy for Stable Coronary Disease

Open access
Maron, David J., Hochman, Judith S., Reynolds, Harmony R., Bangalore, Sripal, O’Brien, Sean M., Boden, William E., Chaitman, Bernard R., Senior, Roxy, López-Sendón, Jose, Alexander, Karen P., Lopes, Renato D., Shaw, Leslee J., Berger, Jeffrey S., Newman, Jonathan D., Sidhu, Mandeep S., Goodman, Shaun G., Ruzyllo, Witold, Gosselin, Gilbert, Maggioni, Aldo P., White, Harvey D., Bhargava, Balram, Min, James K., Mancini, G.B. John, Berman, Daniel S., Picard, Michael H., Kwong, Raymond Y., Ali, Ziad A., Mark, Daniel B., Spertus, John A., Krishnan, Mangalath N., Elghamaz, Ahmed, Moorthy, Nagaraja, Hueb, Whady A., Demkow, Marcin, Mavromatis, Kreton, Bockeria, Olga, Peteiro, Jesus, Miller, Todd D., Szwed, Hanna, Doerr, Rolf, Keltai, Matyas, Selvanayagam, Joseph B., Steg, P. Gabriel, Held, Claes, Kohsaka, Shun, Mavromichalis, Stavroula, Kirby, Ruth, Jeffries, Neal O., Harrell, Frank E., Rockhold, Frank W., Broderick, Samuel, Ferguson, T. Bruce, Williams, David O., Harrington, Robert A., Stone, Gregg W., Rosenberg, Yves·2020·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS: Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, -1.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01471522.).

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1056/nejmoa1915922

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 2,449

Metadata

Authors
Maron, D. J., Hochman, J. S., Reynolds, H. R., Bangalore, S., O’Brien, S. M., Boden, W. E., Chaitman, B. R., Senior, R., López-Sendón, J., Alexander, K. P., Lopes, R. D., Shaw, L. J., Berger, J. S., Newman, J. D., Sidhu, M. S., Goodman, S. G., Ruzyllo, W., Gosselin, G., Maggioni, A. P., White, H. D., Bhargava, B., Min, J. K., Mancini, G. B. J., Berman, D. S., Picard, M. H., Kwong, R. Y., Ali, Z. A., Mark, D. B., Spertus, J. A., Krishnan, M. N., Elghamaz, A., Moorthy, N., Hueb, W. A., Demkow, M., Mavromatis, K., Bockeria, O., Peteiro, J., Miller, T. D., Szwed, H., Doerr, R., Keltai, M., Selvanayagam, J. B., Steg, P. G., Held, C., Kohsaka, S., Mavromichalis, S., Kirby, R., Jeffries, N. O., Harrell, F. E., Rockhold, F. W., Broderick, S., Ferguson, T. B., Williams, D. O., Harrington, R. A., Stone, G. W., & Rosenberg, Y.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2020-04-09
Volume
382
Issue
15
Pages
1395-1407
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W3014025744
Cited by
2,449
References
7
FWCI
317.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Initial Invasive or Conservative Strategy for Stable Coronary Disease. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa1915922
The paper
Maron, D. J., Hochman, J. S., Reynolds, H. R., Bangalore, S., O’Brien, S. M., Boden, W. E., Chaitman, B. R., Senior, R., López-Sendón, J., Alexander, K. P., Lopes, R. D., Shaw, L. J., Berger, J. S., Newman, J. D., Sidhu, M. S., Goodman, S. G., Ruzyllo, W., Gosselin, G., Maggioni, A. P., . . . Rosenberg, Y. (2020). Initial Invasive or Conservative Strategy for Stable Coronary Disease. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1915922

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.