Key result
CABG demonstrates long-term survival and adverse outcome advantages over PCI in chronic ischemic heart disease.
Why the study?
The review was conducted to address debatable issues of myocardial revascularization in chronic forms of ischemic heart disease.
Does percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting provide better long-term survival in patients with chronic coronary artery disease?
Does percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting provide better long-term survival in patients with chronic coronary artery disease?
This review highlights that CABG offers better long-term survival and prevention of adverse outcomes compared to PCI in specific target groups of patients with chronic coronary artery disease.
May inform CABG selection in chronic CAD subsets; leaves open impact of contemporary PCI and medical therapy.
The review addresses debatable issues of myocardial revascularization in chronic forms of ischemic heart disease, shows major differences between percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting in terms of long-term prognosis, and the dependence of the results on the clinical profile of the disease. The review of current publications demonstrates advantages of open surgery in long-term survival and prevention of adverse outcomes in target groups of patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Попова et al. (2023) conducted a review in chronic coronary artery disease. coronary artery bypass grafting vs. percutaneous coronary intervention was evaluated on long-term survival and prevention of adverse outcomes. Coronary artery bypass grafting demonstrated advantages over percutaneous coronary intervention in long-term survival and prevention of adverse outcomes in chronic ischemic heart disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: