Key result
PCI with bioresorbable scaffold shows comparable 30-day major events to MIDCAB for isolated LAD lesions.
Why the study?
Does percutaneous coronary intervention with bioresorbable vascular scaffold improve 30-day outcomes compared to minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass in patients with significant isolated left anterior descending coronary artery disease?
RCT (n=130)
randomized
Does percutaneous coronary intervention with bioresorbable vascular scaffold improve 30-day outcomes compared to minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass in patients with significant isolated left anterior descending coronary artery disease?
Absolute Event Rate: 3.1% vs 0%
p-value: p=0.151
PCI with bioresorbable vascular scaffold and MIDCAB demonstrated comparable 30-day clinical outcomes in patients with stable isolated LAD disease.
Supports PCI with BVS as a less invasive option for isolated LAD lesions; extends short-term RCT data versus MIDCAB.
Aim. To assess the comparative 30-day effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) versus minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) for left anterior descending coronary artery disease. Methods. 130 patients with significant (≥70%) LAD disease were recruited in the study. Patients were randomized either to PCI with BVS (n = 65) or MIDCAB (n = 65). The groups of patients were comparable in baseline demographic, clinical and angiographic parameters. The endpoints included adverse cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, target vessel revascularization) and scaffold thrombosis and were measured on day 30 after the indexed intervention. Results. At 30-day follow-up, there were no significant differences in the incidence of the adverse cardiovascular events between the study groups (0% MIDCAB vs. 3.1% PCI, р = 0.151), myocardial infarction (0% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.151), target vessel revascularization (0% vs. 1.5%, p = 0.32) and scaffold (graft) thrombosis (0% vs. 1.5%, p = 0.32). Conclusion. PCI with BVS and MIDCAB in patients with stable coronary artery disease and isolated left anterior descending lesions demonstrated comparable outcomes at 30-days follow-up.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ваккосов et al. (2018) conducted an RCT in left anterior descending coronary artery disease (n=130). percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) vs. minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) was evaluated on adverse cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, target vessel revascularization) (p=0.151). PCI with bioresorbable vascular scaffold demonstrated comparable 30-day adverse cardiovascular events compared to MIDCAB for isolated LAD lesions (3.1% vs 0%, p=0.151).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: