4.4 Article

One-year outcome after combined coronary artery bypass grafting and transmyocardial laser revascularization for refractory angina pectoris

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 89, Issue 12, Pages 1365-1368

Publisher

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9149(02)02348-2

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Long-term outcomes after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) plus transmyocardial revascularization (TMR) are largely unknown. We report the results of 30-day and 3-, 6-, and 12-month clinical follow-up after CABG plus TMR in a consecutive series of patients with refractory angina pectoris and greater than or equal to1 myocardial ischemic area not amenable to CABG. All patients who underwent CABG plus TMR (n = 169) (mean age 63 +/- 10 years, 70% men, 51% with previous CABG, 82% were deemed inoperable at other heart surgery centers due to small vessels or diffuse disease) between March 1996 and February 2000 were clinically followed and end points of interest (survival, stroke, acute myocardial infarction, and revascularization) and angina class were recorded at 30 days and 3, 6, and 12 months after CABG. At 1 year, actuarial survival and event-free survival were 85% and 81%, respectively. At the end of the first year after the procedure, 7 patients (4%) had angina class III/IV versus 152 patients (90%) at baseline (p <0.001). Predictors of major adverse cardiac events were advanced age (odds ratio [OR] 3.4, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.2 to 9.4, p = 0.01), prolonged intensive care unit stay (OR 3.3, CI 1.1 to 9.7, p <0.001), new-onset atrial fibrillation (OR 2.8, CI 1.1 to 7.0, p = 0.02), and in-hospital myocardial infarction (OR 1.5, CI 1.3 to 1.7, p <0.001). Thus, procedural success at 30 days and overall event-free and actuarial survival in a high-risk population setting shows that CABG plus TMR is a safe revascularization option for patients with intractable angina pectoris. (C) 2002 by Excerpta Medica, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available