4.5 Article

Coronary bypass surgery versus stenting in multivessel disease involving the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery

期刊

HEART
卷 103, 期 6, 页码 428-433

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2016-309720

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective In patients with multivessel disease and proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD) involvement, the best revascularisation strategy is still unclear. We assess outcomes after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents in a pooled analysis of individual patient-level data of the SYNTAX and BEST randomised trials. Design Proximal LAD involvement was defined by any lesion >= 50% diameter stenosis in the arterial segment starting from the left-main bifurcation up to (and including) the origin of the first major septal branch. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke at 5 years of follow-up. Results The present study population comprises 1166 patients of which 577 were randomised to PCI and 589 to CABG. Baseline characteristics were well balanced across study arms. The primary endpoint occurred in 94 (16.3%) patients in the PCI arm and in 68 (11.5%) patients in the CABG arm (HR 1.43; 95% CI 1.05 to 1.95; p=0.026). CABG was also associated with a significantly lower rate of cardiac death (p=0.007), MI (p< 0.001), allcause revascularisation (p< 0.001) and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (all-cause death, MI, stroke, revascularisation) (p< 0.001). The rates of allcause mortality (p=0.06) and stroke (p=0.09) were not statistically different between the two groups. The overall study results for the primary outcome were consistent across several subgroups. Conclusions In patients with multivessel disease with proximal LAD involvement, CABG is associated with lower rates of the safety composite endpoint of death, MI or stroke as compared with PCI with drug-eluting stents at 5 years of follow-up (number needed to treat=21).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据