Why the study?
Does the timing of PCI after CABG affect mortality and clinical outcomes?
Does the timing of PCI after CABG affect mortality and clinical outcomes?
PCI performed less than 72 hours after CABG is feasible but associated with significantly higher mortality and need for redo CABG, likely reflecting a higher-risk patient population.
Early PCI <72h post-CABG was associated with higher mortality; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
The aim of the present study was to identify patients with recurrent ischemia after coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) treated by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Graft failure after CABG may be managed conservatively or treated by surgery or PCI. We thought to investigate clinical, angiographic, and procedural characteristics in relation to clinical outcome. This was a retrospective single-center study. Patients who underwent revascularization by PCI with a previous CABG were analyzed. Patients were divided in 3 groups, depending on interval between CABG and index PCI: group 1, interval <72 hours; group 2, interval between 72 hours and 1 year; group 3, interval >1 year. Two hundred twenty-one patients were studied. Clinical characteristics and survival curves were comparable in groups 2 and 3. Postoperative creatine kinase MB and troponin values were significantly higher in group 1 (P = 0.000). From group 1, significantly more patients (10.5%) required emergency CABG after the index PCI than compared with group 2 (2.1%) and group 3 (0%), (P = 0.003). There were more off-pump CABGs in group 1 than in the other 2 groups. Group 1 received less PCIs in native ungrafted vessels compared with the other 2 groups. Mortality in group 1 (18.4%) was higher than in the other 2 groups (7.4 and 4.5%, respectively; P < 0.05). Mortality in group 1 was higher in the acute phase of follow-up. PCI performed less than 72 hours after CABG is feasible but accompanied by a higher mortality and redo CABG. This outcome is probably related to the high-risk patient category.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tan et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: