Literature DB >> 21547994

Validating the EXCEL hypothesis: a propensity score matched 3-year comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft in left main patients with SYNTAX score ≤32.

Davide Capodanno1, Anna Caggegi, Piera Capranzano, Glauco Cincotta, Marco Miano, Gionbattista Barrano, Sergio Monaco, Francesco Calvo, Corrado Tamburino.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is to verify the study hypothesis of the EXCEL trial by comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) in an EXCEL-like population of patients.
BACKGROUND: The upcoming EXCEL trial will test the hypothesis that left main patients with SYNTAX score ≤ 32 experience similar rates of 3-year death, myocardial infarction (MI), or cerebrovascular accidents (CVA) following revascularization by PCI or CABG.
METHODS: We compared the 3-year rates of death/MI/CVA and death/MI/CVA/target vessel revascularization (MACCE) in 556 patients with left main disease and SYNTAX score ≤ 32 undergoing PCI (n = 285) or CABG (n = 271). To account for confounders, outcome parameters underwent extensive statistical adjustment.
RESULTS: The unadjusted incidence of death/MI/CVA was similar between PCI and CABG (12.7% vs. 8.4%, P = 0.892), while MACCE were higher in the PCI group compared to the CABG group (27.0% vs. 11.8%, P < 0.001). After propensity score matching, PCI was not associated with a significant increase in the rate of death/MI/CVA (11.8% vs. 10.7%, P = 0.948), while MACCE were more frequently noted among patients treated with PCI (28.8% vs. 14.1%, P = 0.002). Adjustment by means of SYNTAX score and EUROSCORE, covariates with and without propensity score, and propensity score alone did not change significantly these findings.
CONCLUSIONS: In an EXCEL-like cohort of patients with left main disease, there seems to be a clinical equipoise between PCI and CABG in terms of death/MI/CVA. However, even in patients with SYNTAX score ≤ 32, CABG is superior to PCI when target vessel revascularization is included in the combined endpoint.
Copyright © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21547994     DOI: 10.1002/ccd.22992

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1522-1946            Impact factor:   2.692


  5 in total

1.  Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Unprotected Left Main Disease - A Review.

Authors:  Edward McNulty
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2013-03

2.  Safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft in patients with STEMI and unprotected left main stem disease: A systematic review & meta-analysis.

Authors:  Talal Almas; Ahson Afzal; Hameeda Fatima; Sadia Yaqoob; Furqan Ahmad Jarullah; Zaeem Ahmed Abbasi; Anoosh Farooqui; Duaa Jaffar; Atiya Batool; Shayan Ahmed; Neha Sara Azmat; Fatima Afzal; Sarah Zafar Khan; Kaneez Fatima
Journal:  Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc       Date:  2022-04-25

Review 3.  Coronary artery revascularization in patients with diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Ehrin J Armstrong; John C Rutledge; Jason H Rogers
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2013-10-08       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 4.  Percutaneous intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery in left main coronary artery stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xin-Lin Zhang; Qing-Qing Zhu; Jing-Jing Yang; Yu-Han Chen; Yang Li; Su-Hui Zhu; Jun Xie; Lian Wang; Li-Na Kang; Biao Xu
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2017-04-21       Impact factor: 8.775

5.  The Predictive Value of the Syntax Score in Patients With Chronic Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  K Papadopoulos; I Lekakis; E Nicolaides
Journal:  Open Cardiovasc Med J       Date:  2017-04-17
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.