Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting for Severe Coronary Artery Disease

被引:3120
|
作者
Serruys, Patrick W. [1 ]
Morice, Marie-Claude [2 ]
Kappetein, A. Pieter [1 ]
Colombo, Antonio [3 ]
Holmes, David R. [4 ]
Mack, Michael J. [5 ]
Stahle, Elisabeth [6 ]
Feldman, Ted E. [7 ]
van den Brand, Marcel [1 ]
Bass, Eric J. [8 ]
Van Dyck, Nic [8 ]
Leadley, Katrin [8 ]
Dawkins, Keith D. [8 ]
Mohr, Friedrich W. [9 ]
机构
[1] Erasmus Univ, Med Ctr, NL-3015 CE Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Inst Cardiovasc Paris Sud, Massy, France
[3] Ist Sci San Raffaele, I-20132 Milan, Italy
[4] Mayo Clin, Rochester, MN USA
[5] Med City Hosp, Dallas, TX USA
[6] Univ Uppsala Hosp, Uppsala, Sweden
[7] Northwestern Univ, Evanston Hosp, Evanston, IL 60201 USA
[8] Boston Sci, Marlborough, MA USA
[9] Herzzentrum Univ Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
关键词
DRUG-ELUTING STENTS; FOLLOW-UP; SURGERY; 3-VESSEL; SYNTAX; REVASCULARIZATION; THROMBOSIS; STENOSIS; OUTCOMES; RISK;
D O I
10.1056/NEJMoa0804626
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) involving drug-eluting stents is increasingly used to treat complex coronary artery disease, although coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been the treatment of choice historically. Our trial compared PCI and CABG for treating patients with previously untreated three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease (or both). Methods We randomly assigned 1800 patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease to undergo CABG or PCI (in a 1: 1 ratio). For all these patients, the local cardiac surgeon and interventional cardiologist determined that equivalent anatomical revascularization could be achieved with either treatment. A noninferiority comparison of the two groups was performed for the primary end point - a major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (i.e., death from any cause, stroke, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization) during the 12-month period after randomization. Patients for whom only one of the two treatment options would be beneficial, because of anatomical features or clinical conditions, were entered into a parallel, nested CABG or PCI registry. Results Most of the preoperative characteristics were similar in the two groups. Rates of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events at 12 months were significantly higher in the PCI group (17.8%, vs. 12.4% for CABG; P = 0.002), in large part because of an increased rate of repeat revascularization (13.5% vs. 5.9%, P<0.001); as a result, the criterion for noninferiority was not met. At 12 months, the rates of death and myocardial infarction were similar between the two groups; stroke was significantly more likely to occur with CABG ( 2.2%, vs. 0.6% with PCI; P = 0.003). Conclusions CABG remains the standard of care for patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease, since the use of CABG, as compared with PCI, resulted in lower rates of the combined end point of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events at 1 year. (ClinicalTrials. gov number, NCT00114972.)
引用
收藏
页码:961 / 972
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Percutaneous coronary intervention versus bypass grafting in left main coronary artery disease
    Munkholm-Larsen, Stine
    Yan, Tristan D.
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE, 2016, 8 (10) : 2677 - 2679
  • [2] Left Main Coronary Artery Disease in Diabetics: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting?
    Disney, Logan
    Ramaiah, Chandrashekhar
    Ramaiah, Meghna
    Keshavamurthy, Suresh
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ANGIOLOGY, 2021, 30 (03) : 194 - 201
  • [3] Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis
    Wang, Zhenzhen
    Zhan, Biming
    Bao, Huihui
    Huang, Xiao
    Wu, Yanqing
    Liang, Qian
    Zhang, Weifang
    Jiang, Long
    Cheng, Xiaoshu
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF THE MEDICAL SCIENCES, 2019, 357 (03) : 230 - 241
  • [4] Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Stenting versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Stable Coronary Artery Disease
    Glenn, Ian C.
    Iacona, Gabriele M.
    Mangi, Abeel A.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ANGIOLOGY, 2021, 30 (03) : 221 - 227
  • [5] Quick Evidence Synopsis Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Patients with Coronary Artery Disease
    Sands-Lincoln, Megan
    Goldmann, David R.
    CARDIOLOGY CLINICS, 2016, 34 (04) : 615 - 621
  • [6] Coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with severe three vessel disease
    Olivares R, Gabriel
    Veas, Nicolas
    REVISTA MEDICA DE CHILE, 2021, 149 (08) : 1182 - 1188
  • [7] Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in CKD
    Berger, Alan K.
    Herzog, Charles A.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF KIDNEY DISEASES, 2010, 55 (01) : 15 - 20
  • [8] Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients with Diabetic Nephropathy and Left Main Coronary Artery Disease
    Li, Hsin-Ru
    Hsu, Chiao-Po
    Sung, Shih-Hsien
    Shih, Chun-Che
    Lin, Shing-Jong
    Chan, Wan-Leong
    Wu, Cheng-Hsueh
    Lu, Tse-Min
    ACTA CARDIOLOGICA SINICA, 2017, 33 (02) : 119 - 126
  • [9] Optimal revascularization for left main coronary artery disease-coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention
    Bostock, Ian C.
    McCullough, Jock N.
    Iribarne, Alexander
    JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE, 2017, 9 (05) : 1171 - 1173
  • [10] Myocardial Revascularization in Patients With 3 Vessel Coronary Artery Disease and Chronic Kidney Disease: Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
    Fialka, Nicholas
    EL-Andari, Ryaan
    Kang, Jimmy
    Hong, Yongzhe
    Mcalister, Finlay A.
    Nagendran, Jayan
    Nagendran, Jeevan
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2025, 243 : 8 - 14