Literature DB >> 8409041

Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI): in-hospital results and 1-year follow-up. ERACI Group.

A Rodriguez1, F Boullon, N Perez-Baliño, C Paviotti, M I Liprandi, I F Palacios.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare freedom from combined cardiac events (death, angina, myocardial infarction) at 1-, 3- and 5-year follow-up in patients with multivessel disease randomized to either percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty or coronary artery bypass graft surgery.
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty has been an effective approach in patients with coronary artery disease, but its role in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease is still controversial.
METHODS: One-hundred twenty-seven patients with multivessel disease and lesions suitable for either form of therapy were randomized to either coronary artery bypass grafting (n = 64) or coronary angioplasty (n = 63). In this study we report the immediate results and freedom from combined cardiac events at 1-year follow-up.
RESULTS: Demographic, clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar in both groups. There were no differences in in-hospital deaths, frequency of periprocedure myocardial infarction or need for emergency revascularization procedures between the two groups. At 1-year follow-up, there were no differences in mortality or in the incidence of myocardial infarction between the groups. However, patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting were more frequently free of angina, reinterventions and combined cardiac events than were patients treated with coronary angioplasty (83.5% vs. 63.7%, p < 0.005). In-hospital cost and cumulative cost at 1-year follow-up were greater for the coronary artery bypass grafting than for the coronary angioplasty group.
CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences were found in major in-hospital complications between patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting or coronary angioplasty. Although at 1-year follow-up there were no differences in survival and freedom from myocardial infarction, patients in the coronary artery bypass grafting group were more frequently free from angina, reinterventions and combined events than were patients in the coronary angioplasty group.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8409041     DOI: 10.1016/0735-1097(93)90416-x

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


  31 in total

Review 1.  Differences in outcome between percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary bypass grafting.

Authors:  J S Alpert
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 2.931

2.  Is surgery still the preferred option for coronary revascularisation in diabetics with multivessel coronary disease?

Authors:  A Kapur; I S Malik
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 3.  Revascularisation in diabetics with multivessel coronary artery disease.

Authors:  K J Beatt; K P Morgan; A Kapur
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 4.  Revascularization for left main and multivessel coronary artery disease in the drug-eluting stent era: integration of recent drug-eluting stent trials.

Authors:  Samip Vasaiwala; David O Williams
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.931

5.  Outcomes of revascularization strategies for two-vessel coronary artery disease involving the proximal left anterior descending artery in an era of improved pharmacotherapy and stenting.

Authors:  Jaroslav Hubacek; Sunil Kalla; P Diane Galbraith; Michelle M Graham; Merril L Knudtson; William A Ghali
Journal:  Can J Cardiol       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 5.223

Review 6.  Barriers to generalizability of health economic evaluations in Latin America and the Caribbean region.

Authors:  Federico Augustovski; Cynthia Iglesias; Andrea Manca; Michael Drummond; Adolfo Rubinstein; Sebastián García Martí
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 4.981

7.  Indications for coronary revascularisation: a Dutch perspective.

Authors:  H Rigter; A P Meijler; J McDonnell; J K Scholma; S J Bernstein
Journal:  Heart       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 5.994

8.  The impact of performing a clinical trial on patient outcomes: lessons from the Emory Angioplasty vs. Surgery Trial.

Authors:  S B King
Journal:  Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc       Date:  1996

Review 9.  Revascularization therapy for coronary artery disease. Coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty.

Authors:  J M Wilson; J J Ferguson
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  1995

Review 10.  Percutaneous versus surgical interventions for coronary artery disease in those with diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Ozlem Soran
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 2.931

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.