Coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous revascularization in acute myocardial infarction?

被引:7
作者
Perrier, Stephanie [1 ]
Kindo, Michel [1 ]
Gerelli, Sebastien [1 ]
Mazzucotelli, Jean-Philippe [1 ]
机构
[1] Hop Univ Strasbourg, Dept Cardiovasc Surg, Strasbourg, France
关键词
Review; Coronary artery bypass; Myocardial infarction; Coronary disease; MULTIVESSEL DISEASE; CARDIOGENIC-SHOCK; INTERVENTION; TRIAL; SURGERY;
D O I
10.1093/icvts/ivt381
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was as follows: is coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery superior to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in terms of in-hospital mortality and morbidity and long-term outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI)? A total of 104 papers were returned using the selected search. Of these, six represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The selection criteria were comparative studies with only PCI and CABG groups in patients with acute MI. Case reports, reviews, recommendations and studies on a specific population or out of the context of acute MI were excluded. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. Almost all PCI patients received stents. One study used drug-eluting stents (DES). Two randomized studies showed similar short- and mid-term morbidities and mortalities in patients with acute MI in the PCI and CABG groups but higher repeat revascularization rates after PCI. Three observational studies found comparable survival, but one of them found more periprocedural events with CABG and the other two found more recurrent ischaemia requiring repeat revascularization in the PCI group. In one cohort study, CABG appeared to be an independent risk factor for death in N-STEMI according to the European Society/American College of Cardiology 2000 definition. The results are strongly influenced by the definition of acute MI. In an institution offering the two techniques with an equivalent accessibility, the principal advantage of PCI is a lower incidence of periprocedural and short-term morbidities. CABG, on the other hand, offers a better durability with less mid-term repeat revascularization required, especially when compared with PCI with DES implantation. Choice had to weight up coronary artery anatomy, number and localization of coronary artery stenosis and accessibility of both PCI and CABG treatments. Medical and surgical discussion within the Heart Team is required to make the best medical decision for each patient.
引用
收藏
页码:1015 / 1019
页数:5
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]  
Alpert JS, 2001, J AM COLL CARDIOL, V37, P973
[2]   Surgical Versus Percutaneous Revascularization for Multivessel Disease in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Analysis From the ACUITY (Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy) Trial [J].
Ben-Gal, Yanai ;
Moses, Jeffrey W. ;
Mehran, Roxana ;
Lanslcy, Alexandra J. ;
Weisz, Giora ;
Nikolsky, Eugenia ;
Argenziano, Michael ;
Williams, Matthew R. ;
Colombo, Antonio ;
Aylward, Philip E. ;
Stone, Gregg W. .
JACC-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS, 2010, 3 (10) :1059-1067
[3]   Comparison of One-Year Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease and Acute Coronary Syndromes (from the CUSTOMIZE Registry) [J].
Caggegi, Anna ;
Capodanno, Davide ;
Capranzano, Piera ;
Chisari, Alberto ;
Ministeri, Margherita ;
Mangiameli, Andrea ;
Ronsivalle, Giuseppe ;
Ricca, Giovanni ;
Barrano, Giombattista ;
Monaco, Sergio ;
Di Salvo, Maria Elena ;
Tamburino, Corrado .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2011, 108 (03) :355-359
[4]   Bypass surgery versus stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease in patients with unstable angina compared with stable angina [J].
de Feyter, PJ ;
Serruys, PW ;
Unger, F ;
Beyar, R ;
de Valk, V ;
Milo, S ;
Simon, R ;
Regensburger, D ;
Crean, PA ;
McGovern, E ;
van den Heuvel, P ;
van Cauwelaert, C ;
Penn, I ;
Tyers, GFO ;
Lindeboom, W .
CIRCULATION, 2002, 105 (20) :2367-2372
[5]  
Dunning Joel, 2003, Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg, V2, P405, DOI 10.1016/S1569-9293(03)00191-9
[6]   Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting as primary revascularization in patients with acute coronary syndrome [J].
Hochholzer, Willibald ;
Buettner, Heinz Joachim ;
Trenk, Dietmar ;
Breidthardt, Tobias ;
Noveanu, Markus ;
Laule, Kirsten ;
Christ, Michael ;
Schindler, Christian ;
Neumann, Franz-Josef ;
Mueller, Christian .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2008, 102 (02) :173-179
[7]   Early revascularization in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock [J].
Hochman, JS ;
Sleeper, LA ;
Webb, JG ;
Sanborn, TA ;
White, HD ;
Talley, JD ;
Buller, CE ;
Jacobs, AK ;
Slater, JN ;
Col, J ;
McKinlay, SM ;
LeJemtel, TH .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1999, 341 (09) :625-634
[8]   Bivalirudin for patients with acute coronary syndromes [J].
Stone, Gregg W. ;
McLaurin, Brent T. ;
Cox, David A. ;
Bertrand, Michel E. ;
Lincoff, A. Michael ;
Moses, Jeffrey W. ;
White, Harvey D. ;
Pocock, Stuart J. ;
Ware, James H. ;
Feit, Frederick ;
Colombo, Antonio ;
Aylward, Philip E. ;
Cequier, Angel R. ;
Darius, Harald ;
Desmet, Walter ;
Ebrahimi, Ramin ;
Hamon, Martial ;
Rasmussen, Lars H. ;
Rupprecht, Hans-Juergen ;
Hoekstra, James ;
Mehran, Roxana ;
Ohman, E. Magnus .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2006, 355 (21) :2203-2216
[9]  
Thygesen K, 2012, CIRCULATION, V126, P2020, DOI [10.1093/eurheartj/ehs184, 10.1161/CIR.0b013e31826e1058, 10.1016/j.gheart.2012.08.001, 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.08.001]
[10]   MYOCARDIAL-INFARCTION AND CORONARY DEATHS IN THE WORLD-HEALTH-ORGANIZATION MONICA PROJECT - REGISTRATION PROCEDURES, EVENT RATES, AND CASE-FATALITY RATES IN 38 POPULATIONS FROM 21 COUNTRIES IN 4 CONTINENTS [J].
TUNSTALLPEDOE, H ;
KUULASMAA, K ;
AMOUYEL, P ;
ARVEILER, D ;
RAJAKANGAS, AM ;
PAJAK, A .
CIRCULATION, 1994, 90 (01) :583-612