Key result
Percutaneous coronary intervention for left anterior descending chronic total occlusion was associated with a higher rate of major adverse cardiac events at 12 months compared to coronary artery bypass grafting (25% vs 15%, p=0.049).
Why the study?
Does PCI compared to CABG improve clinical outcomes in patients with isolated LAD CTO?
Observational (n=80)
None
No
Does PCI compared to CABG improve clinical outcomes in patients with isolated LAD CTO?
CABG may offer superior short-term outcomes compared to PCI for isolated LAD CTO, primarily by reducing the need for repeat revascularization.
Results: During the period of follow up ( 12 months) , total MACE ( major adverse cardiac events) was more common in PCI group (10 patients, 25%) than in CABG group (6 patients, 15%, P= 0.049) but there was no significant difference in death ( Summary and Conclusion: Our findings suggest that CABG remained a superior intervention for patients with isolated LAD CTO lesion than PCI. The most benefit of CABG was to reduce the odds of repeat revascularization as compared with PCI in a short-term follow-up.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2015 study conducted an observational in Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery Chronic Total Occlusion (n=80). Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) vs. Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG) was evaluated on Total major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 12 months (p=0.049). Percutaneous coronary intervention for left anterior descending chronic total occlusion was associated with a higher rate of major adverse cardiac events at 12 months compared to coronary artery bypass grafting (25% vs 15%, p=0.049).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: