Key result
CABG in patients with coronary arteries ≤1.5 mm and ≤1 mm was associated with 1-year recurrent angina rates of 11.3% and 30.6%, respectively, compared to 9.2% in patients with arteries >1.5 mm.
Why the study?
The study evaluated the efficacy of CABG in patients with coronary artery diameter <1.5 mm compared with outcomes in patients with larger coronary vessels.
Does CABG in coronary arteries <1.5 mm have comparable early and 1-year outcomes to CABG in arteries >1.5 mm?
Cohort (n=200)
Pseudo-randomized
Does CABG in coronary arteries <1.5 mm have comparable early and 1-year outcomes to CABG in arteries >1.5 mm?
Absolute Event Rate: 11.3% vs 9.2%
CABG in coronary arteries ≤1.5 mm shows high efficacy, but grafting arteries ≤1 mm is associated with higher rates of recurrent angina and shunt occlusion at 1 year.
Supports CABG feasibility for arteries ≤1.5 mm; leaves open long-term patency and strategy for ≤1 mm vessels.
No abstract yet. The journal hasn't published one we can show.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zaikovskii et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease requiring CABG (n=200). Coronary artery diameter <1.5 mm vs. Coronary artery diameter >1.5 mm was evaluated on Recurrent angina > class I at 1 year. CABG in patients with coronary arteries ≤1.5 mm and ≤1 mm was associated with 1-year recurrent angina rates of 11.3% and 30.6%, respectively, compared to 9.2% in patients with arteries >1.5 mm.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: