CABG Versus PCI Greater Benefit in Long-Term Outcomes with Multiple Arterial Bypass Grafting Presented in part as an oral Plenary Session presentation at the American Association for Thoracic Surgeons Meeting, April 26 to 30, 2014, Toronto, Canada

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Date

Authors

Habib, Robert H.
Dimitrova, Kamellia R.
Badour, Sanaa A.
Yammine, Maroun B.
Sleiman, Karim
Hoffman, Darryl M.
Geller, Charles M.
Schwann, Thomas A.
Tranbaugh, Robert F.

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Elsevier Inc.

Abstract

Background Treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease with traditional single-arterial coronary artery bypass graft (SA-CABG) has been associated with superior intermediate-term survival and reintervention compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using either bare-metal stents (BMS) or drug-eluting stents (DES). Objectives This study sought to investigate longer-term outcomes including the potential added advantage of multiarterial coronary artery bypass graft (MA-CABG). Methods We studied 8,402 single-institution, primary revascularization, multivessel coronary artery disease patients: 2,207 BMS-PCI (age 66.6 ± 11.9 years); 2,381 DES-PCI (age 65.9 ± 11.7 years); 2,289 SA-CABG (age 69.3 ± 9.0 years); and 1,525 MA-CABG (age 58.3 ± 8.7 years). Patients with myocardial infarction within 24 h, shock, or left main stents were excluded. Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox regression were used to separately compare 9-year all-cause mortality and unplanned reintervention for BMS-PCI and DES-PCI to respective propensity-matched SA-CABG and MA-CABG cohorts. Results BMS-PCI was associated with worse survival than SA-CABG, especially from 0 to 7 years (p = 0.015) and to a greater extent than MA-CABG was (9-year follow-up: 76.3% vs. 86.9%; p < 0.001). The surgery-to-BMS-PCI hazard ratios (HR) were as follows: versus SA-CABG, HR: 0.87; and versus MA-CABG, HR: 0.38. DES-PCI showed similar survival to SA-CABG except for a modest 0 to 3 years surgery advantage (HR: 1.06; p = 0.615). Compared with MA-CABG, DES-PCI exhibited worse survival at 5 (86.3% vs. 95.6%) and 9 (82.8% vs. 89.8%) years (HR: 0.45; p <0.001). Reintervention was substantially worse with PCI for all comparisons (all p <0.001). Conclusions Multiarterial surgical revascularization, compared with either BMS-PCI or DES-PCI, resulted in substantially enhanced death and reintervention-free survival. Accordingly, MA-CABG represents the optimal therapy for multivessel coronary artery disease and should be enthusiastically adopted by multidisciplinary heart teams as the best evidence-based therapy. © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Description

Keywords

Arterial grafting, Coronary stents, Myocardial revascularization, Propensity matching, Aged, Coronary artery bypass, Coronary artery disease, Coronary vessels, Female, Humans, Male, Middle aged, Percutaneous coronary intervention, Prospective studies, Retrospective studies, Survival rate, Time factors, Treatment outcome, Adult, Article, Bare metal stent, Cardiovascular mortality, Clinical effectiveness, Cohort analysis, Controlled study, Coronary artery bypass graft, Coronary artery recanalization, Drug eluting coronary stent, Everolimus eluting coronary stent, Evidence based medicine, Follow up, Hazard ratio, Human, Intermethod comparison, Intervention study, Kaplan meier method, Long term survival, Major clinical study, Outcome assessment, Paclitaxel eluting coronary stent, Priority journal, Reoperation, Sex ratio, Sirolimus eluting coronary stent, Surgical mortality, Survival time, Zotarolimus eluting coronary stent, Comparative study, Coronary blood vessel, Mortality, Pathology, Procedures, Prospective study, Retrospective study, Time, Trends

Citation

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By