Background: Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) is recommended for patients with unprotected left main stenosis (ULMS). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is only recommended in specific anatomic conditions as in patients with low/mid SYNTAX score (SS). The aim of this study was to assess if the clinical and anatomic global risk classification (GRC) can enhance the indication of both revascularization therapies.
Methods: A total of 407 patients with ULMS treated with CABG (n = 285) or PCI (n = 122) were prospectively collected. The decision to treat with CABG or PCI was dependent on patient and physician's choice. Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, shock, or valve disease were excluded. Clinical follow-up was obtained at 3 years.
Results: Patients with low GRC (n = 151) treated with CABG vs those with PCI had similar cardiac mortality (5.9% vs 0%, respectively; P=.17) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE; 18.5% vs 12.5%, respectively; P=.40). Patients classified as mid GRC (n = 175) had similar cardiac death (11.1% vs 10.3%; P=.85) and MACE rates (20.7% vs 22.4%; P=.92) with CABG or PCI, respectively. Patients with high GRC (n = 81) treated with CABG had numerically fewer cardiac deaths (16.3% vs 28.1%; P=.16) and lower MACE rates (24.5% vs 40.6%; P=.048) than with PCI. Statistical models using the GRC as a predictor of cardiac death showed better goodness-of-fit than the SS.
Conclusion: Patients with low/mid GRC have similar mid-term outcomes with either CABG or PCI; patients with high GRC seem to benefit from CABG. Although further investigations are required, GRC is a better predictor of outcomes than SS.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|
Braz J Cardiovasc Surg
January 2025
Coronary Center, Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Miller Family Heart, Vascular, & Thoracic Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States.
In Vitro Model
June 2024
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO USA.
Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) remain the leading cause of death worldwide, and the most common form is coronary artery disease (CAD). Treatment options include coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) or percutaneous heart intervention (PCI), but both have drawbacks. Bare metal stents (BMS) are commonly used to treat CAD; however, they lead to restenosis.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFRev Cardiovasc Med
January 2025
Department of Cardiology, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, 430060 Wuhan, Hubei, China.
Background: Ceramide, a key molecule in sphingolipid metabolism, is recognized as a standalone predictor of long-term major adverse cardiac events (MACE). We explore if integrating the global registry of acute coronary events (GRACE) score with the ceramide risk score (ceramide test 1, CERT1) improves MACE prediction in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
Methods: This cohort study included 210 participants with ACS undergoing PCI.
Circ J
January 2025
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine.
Background: Fatal arrhythmic events (FAEs), such as sudden cardiac death (SCD) and fatal ventricular arrhythmias, are a devastating complication in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Therefore, in this study we aimed to assess the incidence of FAEs in more recent Japanese patients with CAD and to examine whether risk stratification of FAEs can still be feasible using the left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).
Methods And Results: In the CREDO Kyoto PCI/CABG registry cohorts-2 and -3, there were 25,843 patients with LVEF data who received a first coronary revascularization (LVEF ≤35% group: N=1,671, 35%
Ann Thorac Surg
January 2025
Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV.
Background: As percutaneous therapeutic options expand, the optimal management of severe aortic stenosis (AS) and concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) is being questioned between coronary artery bypass grafting and surgical aortic valve replacement (CABG+SAVR) versus percutaneous coronary intervention and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (PCI+TAVR). We sought to compare perioperative and longitudinal risk-adjusted outcomes between patients undergoing CABG+SAVR versus PCI+TAVR.
Methods: Using the United States Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services inpatient claims database, we evaluated all patient age 65 and older with AS and CAD undergoing CABG+SAVR or PCI+TAVR (2018-2022).
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!