Literature DB >> 20946993

Long-term outcomes after stenting versus coronary artery bypass grafting for unprotected left main coronary artery disease: 10-year results of bare-metal stents and 5-year results of drug-eluting stents from the ASAN-MAIN (ASAN Medical Center-Left MAIN Revascularization) Registry.

Duk-Woo Park1, Young-Hak Kim, Sung-Cheol Yun, Jong-Young Lee, Won-Jang Kim, Soo-Jin Kang, Seung-Whan Lee, Cheol-Whan Lee, Jae-Joong Kim, Suk-Jung Choo, Cheol-Hyun Chung, Jae-Won Lee, Seong-Wook Park, Seung-Jung Park.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the long-term safety and effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), as compared with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease.
BACKGROUND: Data on the long-term (beyond 5-year) comparative results of treatment of unprotected LMCA disease with stent implantation or CABG are limited.
METHODS: We performed a 10-year clinical follow-up of 350 patients with unprotected LMCA disease who underwent PCI with bare-metal stents (BMS) (n = 100) or CABG (n = 250) from January 1995 to April 1999, and 5-year clinical follow-up of 395 patients with unprotected LMCA disease who underwent PCI with drug-eluting stents (DES) (n = 176) or CABG (n = 219) from January 2003 to May 2004. The primary safety end points were all-cause mortality and the composite of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke, and the primary efficacy end point was target vessel revascularization (TVR).
RESULTS: In the 10-year follow-up cohort of BMS and concurrent CABG, the adjusted risks of death (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44 to 1.50; p = 0.50) and the composite of death, Q-wave MI, or stroke (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.55 to 1.53; p = 0.74) were similar between the 2 groups. The rate of TVR was significantly higher in the group that received BMS (HR: 10.34; 95% CI: 4.61 to 23.18; p < 0.001). In the 5-year follow-up cohort of DES and concurrent CABG, there was no significant difference in the adjusted risk of death (HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.34 to 2.07; p = 0.70) or the risk of the composite outcome (HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.83; p = 0.79). The rates of TVR were also higher in the DES group than the CABG group (HR: 6.22; 95% CI: 2.26 to 17.14; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of unprotected LMCA disease, PCI with stent implantation showed similar long-term mortality and rates of death, Q-wave MI, or stroke. However, stenting, even with DES, was associated with higher rates of repeat revascularization than was CABG.
Copyright © 2010 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20946993     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.03.097

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  29 in total

1.  Bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention for the treatment of unprotected left main disease. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  S Desch; E Boudriot; A Rastan; P E Buszman; A Bochenek; F W Mohr; G Schuler; H Thiele
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2012-03-11       Impact factor: 1.443

Review 2.  Surgical versus percutaneous revascularization in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Piroze M Davierwala; Freidrich W Mohr
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 5.113

3.  Very long-term follow-up for left main coronary artery stenting: a missing piece of the jigsaw puzzle.

Authors:  Yalcin Velibey; Tolga Sinan Guvenc; Ahmet Taha Alper
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  Stenting or bypass surgery for unprotected left main coronary artery disease-still a long rally to go.

Authors:  Tzu-Hsien Tsai; Cheng-I Cheng
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.895

5.  Percutaneous coronary intervention in left main disease: SYNTAX, PRECOMBAT, EXCEL and NOBLE-combined cardiology and cardiac surgery perspective.

Authors:  Duk-Woo Park; Jung-Min Ahn; Seung-Jung Park; David P Taggart
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2018-07

6.  [Left main intervention: options and limitations in interventional cardiology].

Authors:  E Boudriot; H Thiele; G Schuler
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.443

7.  Why coronary artery bypass surgery is still the optimal treatment strategy for left main stem disease: an evidence-based review with a Malaysian surgical perspective.

Authors:  Anand Sachithanandan; Balaji Badmanaban
Journal:  Heart Asia       Date:  2011-01-01

8.  Impact of the bifurcation angle on major cardiac events after cross-over single stent strategy in unprotected left main bifurcation lesions: 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiographic analysis.

Authors:  Kisaki Amemiya; Takenori Domei; Masashi Iwabuchi; Shinichi Shirai; Kenji Ando; Masahiko Goya; Hiroyoshi Yokoi; Masakiyo Nobuyoshi
Journal:  Am J Cardiovasc Dis       Date:  2014-12-29

9.  Stenting of left main coronary artery stenosis: A to Z.

Authors:  Debabrata Dash
Journal:  Heart Asia       Date:  2013-01-25

10.  Is percutaneous coronary intervention as effective as bypass surgery in left main stem coronary artery stenosis?

Authors:  T Stiermaier; G Schuler; E Boudriot; S Desch; H Thiele
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 1.443

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.