Literature DB >> 12091818

Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with stenting in isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery: six months' angiographic and clinical follow-up of a prospective randomized study.

Derk J Drenth1, Jobst B Winter, Nic J G M Veeger, Stefan H J Monnink, Ad J van Boven, Jan G Grandjean, Massimo A Mariani, Piet W Boonstra.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (surgical intervention) with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with primary stenting (stenting) in patients having an isolated high-grade stenosis (American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association classification type B2 or C) of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery. At 6 months, both procedures were compared on the basis of quantitative angiography and clinical outcome.
METHODS: Both treatments were compared in a single-center, prospective, randomized study. The primary end point of this study was quantitative angiographic outcome at 6 months. The secondary end point was 6-month clinical outcome. Statistical analysis was performed in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle.
RESULTS: From March 1997 to September 1999, patients with angina pectoris caused by an isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery were randomly assigned to surgical intervention (n = 51) or stenting (n = 51). At 6 months, quantitative coronary angiography showed an anastomotic stenosis rate of 4% after surgical intervention and a restenosis rate of 29% after stenting (P <.001). Periprocedural events did not significantly differ between surgical intervention and stenting. After surgical intervention, 2 patients died; no patients died after stenting. After 6 months, no significant difference was found for major adverse cardiac or cerebral events and need for repeat target vessel revascularization. After 6 months, return of angina pectoris, physical work capacity, and use of antianginal drugs did not significantly differ between treatments.
CONCLUSIONS: After 6 months, surgical intervention had a significantly better angiographic outcome than stenting in patients with an isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery. Clinical outcome did not significantly differ between treatments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12091818     DOI: 10.1067/mtc.2002.122525

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0022-5223            Impact factor:   5.209


  10 in total

1.  Percutaneous coronary intervention: recommendations for good practice and training.

Authors:  K D Dawkins; T Gershlick; M de Belder; A Chauhan; G Venn; P Schofield; D Smith; J Watkins; H H Gray
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 2.  The practicing physician's current perspective on therapeutic options in coronary artery disease.

Authors:  D J Drenth; F Zijlstra; P W Boonstra
Journal:  Neth Heart J       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 2.380

Review 3.  Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting for people with stable angina or acute coronary syndromes.

Authors:  A Bakhai; R A Hill; Y Dundar; R Dickson; T Walley
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2005-01-25

Review 4.  Minimally invasive surgery or stenting for left anterior descending artery disease - meta-analysis.

Authors:  Monica Gianoli; Anne R de Jong; Kirolos A Jacob; Hanae F Namba; Niels P van der Kaaij; Pim van der Harst; Willem J L Suyker
Journal:  Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc       Date:  2022-05-10

Review 5.  Reduced risk of myocardial infarct and revascularization following coronary artery bypass grafting compared with percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with chronic kidney disease.

Authors:  David M Charytan; Manisha Desai; Maya Mathur; Noam M Stern; Maria M Brooks; Lukasz J Krzych; Gerhard C Schuler; Jan Kaehler; Alfredo M Rodriguez-Granillo; Whady Hueb; Barnaby C Reeves; Holger Thiele; Alfredo E Rodriguez; Piotr P Buszman; Paweł E Buszman; Rie Maurer; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2016-06-01       Impact factor: 10.612

Review 6.  Cerebrovascular Events After No-Touch Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting, Conventional Side-Clamp Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass, and Proximal Anastomotic Devices: A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Wojciech Pawliszak; Mariusz Kowalewski; Giuseppe Maria Raffa; Pietro Giorgio Malvindi; Magdalena Ewa Kowalkowska; Krzysztof Aleksander Szwed; Alina Borkowska; Janusz Kowalewski; Lech Anisimowicz
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2016-02-18       Impact factor: 5.501

Review 7.  Minimally invasive direct coronary bypass compared with percutaneous coronary intervention for left anterior descending artery disease: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xiao-Wen Wang; Can Qu; Chun Huang; Xiao-Yong Xiang; Zhi-Qian Lu
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2016-08-05       Impact factor: 1.637

Review 8.  Minimally invasive and robotic coronary artery bypass grafting-a 25-year review.

Authors:  Johannes Bonatti; Stephanie Wallner; Ingo Crailsheim; Martin Grabenwöger; Bernhard Winkler
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2021-03       Impact factor: 2.895

9.  Comparison of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass and drug-eluting stents for management of isolated left anterior descending artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 7,710 patients.

Authors:  Shahzad G Raja; Mohsin Uzzaman; Sheena Garg; Gowthanan Santhirakumaran; Michelle Lee; Manish K Soni; Habib Khan
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2018-09

10.  Unanswered ethical and scientific questions for trials of invasive interventions for coronary disease: The case of single vessel disease.

Authors:  Samer Jabbour; Shmuel Ravid; Bernard Lown
Journal:  Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2004-03-29
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.