Literature DB >> 11579343

Combination of minimally invasive coronary bypass and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in the treatment of double-vessel coronary disease: Two-year follow-up of a new hybrid procedure compared with "on-pump" double bypass grafting.

D de Cannière1, J L Jansens, P Goldschmidt-Clermont, L Barvais, P Decroly, E Stoupel.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) or surgery can be chosen as first-line therapies in multiple-vessel coronary disease. A mammary-to-left anterior descending (LAD) graft is the most important statistical determinant of a favorable outcome after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and can be performed with lower morbidity off pump through a minithoracotomy. PTCA and stenting of the "non-LAD" vessels compete with CABG in terms of patency rates. Our purpose was to compare a combination of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) and PTCA with double CABG as a treatment for double-vessel coronary artery disease involving the proximal LAD.
METHODS: Two matched groups of 20 patients with double-vessel coronary disease undergoing either sequential MIDCAB and PTCA (group 1) or double CABG on cardiopulmonary bypass (group 2) were compared. Angiographic control, complications, hospital costs, quality of life, and 2-year follow-up of ischemia are reported.
RESULTS: All bypasses were patent at early control. Three adverse events were noted in group 1 and 17 in group 2. The hybrid-procedure group exhibited a shorter intensive care unit stay, fewer blood products transfused, less pain, better early quality of life, faster return to work, and similar cost. Three patients required a second PTCA in group 1, one of which for restenosis. At 2 years all the patients are asymptomatic with no residual ischemia.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude from this pilot study that the hybrid procedure is feasible and appears to be a safe therapy for double-vessel coronary artery disease and that it appears to generate less perioperative morbidity than classic double CABG does. Therefore we believe that there is room to undertake prospective randomized studies on a larger-scale basis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11579343     DOI: 10.1067/mhj.2001.118466

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am Heart J        ISSN: 0002-8703            Impact factor:   4.749


  9 in total

Review 1.  Will drug-eluting stents replace coronary artery bypass surgery?

Authors:  Ross M Reul
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2005

2.  Hybrid myocardial revascularization.

Authors:  Yugal Kishore Mishra; Jatin Yadav
Journal:  Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2018-03-05

Review 3.  Comparison of hybrid coronary revascularization versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Li Yu; Keying Zhu; Nannan Du; Yuexiu Si; Jiali Liang; Ruijing Shen; Bangsheng Chen
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2022-06-07       Impact factor: 1.522

Review 4.  Combining PCI and CABG: the role of hybrid revascularization.

Authors:  Kelly D Green; Donald R Lynch; Tyffany P Chen; David Zhao
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.931

5.  Hybrid approach for complex coronary artery and valve disease: a clinical follow-up study.

Authors:  J O J Peels; G A J Jessurun; P W Boonstra; T Ebels; D J van Veldhuisen; I C C van der Horst; F Zijlstra
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.380

Review 6.  Contemporary use of arterial and venous conduits in coronary artery bypass grafting: anatomical, functional and clinical aspects.

Authors:  G Cuminetti; S Gelsomino; S Curello; R Lorusso; J G Maessen; J C A Hoorntje
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 2.380

Review 7.  Hybrid coronary revascularization versus conventional coronary artery bypass grafting: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Alexander C Reynolds; Nicola King
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 1.889

8.  Hybrid coronary revascularization vs. percutaneous coronary interventions for multivessel coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Edward L Hannan; Yi-Feng Wu; Kimberly Cozzens; Jacqueline Tamis-Holland; Frederick S K Ling; Alice K Jacobs; Ferdinand J Venditti; Peter B Berger; Gary Walford; Spencer B King Iii
Journal:  J Geriatr Cardiol       Date:  2021-03-28       Impact factor: 3.327

9.  Hybrid coronary revascularization as a safe, feasible, and viable alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting: what is the current evidence?

Authors:  Arjan J F P Verhaegh; Ryan E Accord; Leen van Garsse; Jos G Maessen
Journal:  Minim Invasive Surg       Date:  2013-04-03
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.