Observes lower repeat revascularization with bypass surgery versus stenting in intermediate SYNTAX scores, indicating long-term procedural tradeoffs.
BACKGROUND: Choosing the method of revascularization - coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) - remains debatable. METHODS: We selected 406 patients with multivessel disease who underwent PCI with a drug-eluting stent (DES) (n = 200, 100 with a SYNTAX score (SS) ≤ 22 and 100 with a SS 23-32); and CABG (n = 206, 100 with a SS ≤ 22 and 106 with a SS 23-32). The mean follow-up period was 9±1.9 years. The endpoints of the study were as follows: major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (МАССЕ), a repeat revascularization (RR), diminished left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and high SS in dynamics. RESULTS: Patients with an intermediate SS needed RR more often with PCI than after CABG (64 % vs 22.6 %; HR: 3.52; CI: 2.19-5.66; р < 0.001). We found no significant differences for other MACCE between the groups. The decrease in LVEF was greater in the low SS subgroup in operated patients than after PCI (39.5 % vs 27.7 %; HR: 0.57; CI: 0.34-0.98; p = 0.04). The difference between the initial and final SS, was greater after the CABG than after PCI (43.5 % vs 10.9 %; HR: 0.26; CI: 0.14-0.47; р < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: After 9 ± 1.9 years in intermediate SS group CABG exhibited an advantage over PCI with DES in terms of the MACCE indicators due to a smaller number of RR in the CABG group. The CABG group showed a more significant progression of atherosclerosis, and more heart failure cases (Tab. 2, Fig. 4, Ref. 29). Text in PDF www.elis.sk Keywords: coronary artery disease, coronary artery bypass grafting, percutaneous coronary intervention, SYNTAX score.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Madiyeva et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: