Coronary artery bypass grafting versus drug-eluting stents implantation for previous myocardial infarction

14Citations
Citations of this article
46Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Patients with previous myocardial infarction (MI) have a high risk of recurrence. Little is known about the effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with a previous MI and left main or multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). We compared long-term outcomes of these 2 strategies in 672 patients with previous MI and left main or multivessel CAD, who underwent CABG (n = 349) or PCI with DES (n = 323). A pooled database from the BEST, PRECOMBAT, and SYNTAX trials was analyzed, and the primary outcome was a composite of death from any causes, MI, or stroke. Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. The median follow-up duration was 59.8 months. The rate of the primary outcome was significantly lower with CABG than PCI (hazard ratio [HR] 0.59, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.82; p = 0.002). This difference was driven by a marked reduction in the rate of MI (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.55, p <0.001). The benefit of CABG over PCI was consistent across all major subgroups. The individual risks of death from any causes or stroke were comparable between the 2 groups. Conversely, the rate of repeat revascularization was significantly lower with CABG than PCI (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.51, p <0.001). In conclusion, in the patients with previous MI and left main or multivessel CAD, compared to PCI with DES, CABG significantly reduces the risk of death from any causes, MI, or stroke.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Chang, M., Lee, C. W., Ahn, J. M., Cavalcante, R., Sotomi, Y., Onuma, Y., … Park, S. J. (2016). Coronary artery bypass grafting versus drug-eluting stents implantation for previous myocardial infarction. In American Journal of Cardiology (Vol. 118, pp. 17–22). Elsevier Inc. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.04.009

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free