Literature DB >> 3499880

Medical versus early surgical therapy in patients with triple-vessel disease and mild angina pectoris: a CASS registry study of survival.

W O Myers1, B J Gersh, L D Fisher, M B Mock, D R Holmes, H V Schaff, S Gillispie, T J Ryan, G C Kaiser.   

Abstract

Results of coronary artery bypass grafting were evaluated in 856 nonrandomized patients in the Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) registry with mild angina (Canadian Cardiovascular Society Classes I and II) and three-vessel disease, defined as 70% or more stenosis in the proximal or middle segment of the three major coronary arteries. There were 413 patients with medical therapy and 443 with early operation. Patients with delayed operation were kept in the medical group for analysis. Six-year survival adjusted for left ventricular (LV) function and number of proximal stenoses was 67% for medical and 84% for surgical patients (p less than 0.0001). Patients with normal LV function had equal survival with medicine or surgical intervention. Those with mild or moderate LV dysfunction (CASS LV wall motion score 6 to 9 and 10 to 15, respectively) and at least one proximal stenosis (the dominant right coronary artery) had increased probability of being alive at six years with surgical treatment. In patients with severe LV impairment (LV score higher than 15) and in those whose only proximal stenosis of 70% or more (in three-vessel disease) was located in the left anterior descending coronary artery, increased survival with surgical treatment could not be demonstrated. This is a nonrandomized observational study with the limitations of such studies: the need to adjust for differences in baseline traits between medical and surgical groups and the possibility of an unrecognized imbalance in baseline characteristics. In a Cox analysis of variables influencing outcome, early surgical treatment was an independent predictor of survival with 43% the risk of medical treatment (95% confidence range: 29 to 62%). Adjustment by propensity analysis to reduce selection bias from known differences in baseline variables did not alter results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1987        PMID: 3499880     DOI: 10.1016/s0003-4975(10)62104-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg        ISSN: 0003-4975            Impact factor:   4.330


  6 in total

Review 1.  A review of the application of propensity score methods yielded increasing use, advantages in specific settings, but not substantially different estimates compared with conventional multivariable methods.

Authors:  Til Stürmer; Manisha Joshi; Robert J Glynn; Jerry Avorn; Kenneth J Rothman; Sebastian Schneeweiss
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2005-10-13       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  What's new in trial design: propensity scores, equivalence, and non-inferiority.

Authors:  Paul S Myles
Journal:  J Extra Corpor Technol       Date:  2009-12

3.  Nontransplant surgical alternatives for heart failure.

Authors:  Edwin C McGee; Kathleen L Grady; Patrick M McCarthy
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2005-12

4.  Delay to invasive investigation and revascularisation for coronary heart disease in south west Thames region: a two tier system?

Authors:  M Marber; C MacRae; M Joy
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1991-05-18

5.  Effectiveness of Clinical, Surgical and Percutaneous Treatment to Prevent Cardiovascular Events in Patients Referred for Elective Coronary Angiography: An Observational Study.

Authors:  Adriana Silveira Almeida; Sandra C Fuchs; Felipe C Fuchs; Aline Gonçalves Silva; Marcelo Balbinot Lucca; Samuel Scopel; Flávio D Fuchs
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2020-07-16

Review 6.  Therapeutic Options for Left Main, Left Main Equivalent, and Three-Vessel Disease.

Authors:  James J Glazier; Bayoan Ramos-Parra; Amir Kaki
Journal:  Int J Angiol       Date:  2021-02-12
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.