Douglas Farmer1,2,3, Ernesto Jimenez4,5,6. 1. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA. douglas.farmer@bcm.edu. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Texas Heart Institute, Houston, TX, USA. douglas.farmer@bcm.edu. 3. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA. douglas.farmer@bcm.edu. 4. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA. 5. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Texas Heart Institute, Houston, TX, USA. 6. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The use of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has markedly declined during the past decade, with an increase in the use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, long-term data continues to show survival advantages for patients undergoing CABG over PCI. We describe the current indications for and outcomes of CABG in patients who present with ACS. RECENT FINDINGS: Real-world studies demonstrate better long-term outcomes with CABG than with PCI after NSTE-ACS. Staged CABG after culprit-vessel PCI for STEMI is also a feasible option in certain patients. In patients presenting with ACS and cardiogenic shock who are treated with CABG, the use of mechanical circulatory support has produced a limited but significant reduction in mortality. The optimal revascularization strategy after ACS depends on many variables. The pre-eminent factor in selecting the best mode of revascularization and improving outcomes is careful patient selection based on deliberation by an interdisciplinary heart team.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The use of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has markedly declined during the past decade, with an increase in the use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, long-term data continues to show survival advantages for patients undergoing CABG over PCI. We describe the current indications for and outcomes of CABG in patients who present with ACS. RECENT FINDINGS: Real-world studies demonstrate better long-term outcomes with CABG than with PCI after NSTE-ACS. Staged CABG after culprit-vessel PCI for STEMI is also a feasible option in certain patients. In patients presenting with ACS and cardiogenic shock who are treated with CABG, the use of mechanical circulatory support has produced a limited but significant reduction in mortality. The optimal revascularization strategy after ACS depends on many variables. The pre-eminent factor in selecting the best mode of revascularization and improving outcomes is careful patient selection based on deliberation by an interdisciplinary heart team.