Abstract Objective: To evaluate whether there is any difference on the results of patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the setting of ischemic heart failure (HF). Methods: Databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register [CENTRAL/CCTR], ClinicalTrials.gov, Scientific Electronic Library Online [SciELO], Literatura Latino-americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde [LILACS], and Google Scholar) were searched for studies published until February 2019. Main outcomes of interest were mortality, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and stroke. Results: The search yielded 5,775 studies for inclusion. Of these, 20 articles were analyzed, and their data were extracted. The total number of patients included was 54,173, and those underwent CABG (N=29,075) or PCI (N=25098). The hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality (HR 0.763; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.678-0.859; P<0.001), myocardial infarction (HR 0.481; 95% CI 0.365-0.633; P<0.001), and repeat revascularization (HR 0.321; 95% CI 0.241-0.428; P<0.001) were lower in the CABG group than in the PCI group. The HR for stroke showed no statistically significant difference between the groups (random effect model: HR 0.879; 95% CI 0.625-1.237; P=0.459). Conclusion: This meta-analysis found that CABG surgery remains the best option for patients with ischemic HF, without increase in the risk of stroke.

A Avaliação Executiva de Indicadores (AEI) é uma tecnologia criada pelo governo de Minas Gerais, por intermédio do Programa Estado para Resultados, para ser empregada na avaliação sistemática da qualidade dos indicadores monitorados no âmbito da gestão estratégica do estado de Minas Gerais. O instrumento consiste em 34 perguntas, reunidas em quatro eixos temáticos: produção dos dados, produção do indicador, conceito e metodologia, e uso e comunicação. Os quesitos avaliados estão associados aos atributos desejáveis aos indicadores, como clareza, relevância, adequação, tempestividade e especificidade. A metodologia desenvolvida foi aplicada na avaliação da carteira de indicadores de 2009, composta por 104 indicadores. A avaliação resultou na identificação das características positivas e das lacunas do processo de produção de cada indicador, referenciando o trabalho de consolidação da carteira de indicadores na gestão para resultados. A AEI agrega valor à atividade de monitoramento, incentivando o desenvolvimento de medidas adequadas dos resultados das políticas públicas e contribuindo para o fortalecimento do modelo de contratação de resultado na gestão mineira.

The Indicators Executive Evaluation (AEI) is a methodology developed by the government of Minas Gerais, through the Program State for Results, to be systematically used to evaluate the quality of the indicators monitored in the strategic management of Minas Gerais. This tool consists in 34 questions, grouped in four thematic axes: Data Production, Indicator Production, Concepts and Methodology, and Use and Communication. Those attributes evaluated are associated with desirable indicator's characteristics, such as clarity, relevance, adequacy, timing and specificity. The methodology was applied to the set of indicators monitored in 2009 (104 indicators). The evaluation provided, for each indicator, the identification of gaps in the indicator production process, which was very useful to strengthen the portfolio of indicators. At last, this paper points out the value added by the AEI in the monitoring activity, encouraging the development of more appropriate measures for the public policies' results and helping to strengthen the performance-based contracting model of the State.