Background: Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery has traditionally represented the standard of care for left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. However, percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation (PCI) has more recently emerged as a valuable alternative. The long-time awaited results of the largest randomized trials on the long-term impact of PCI versus CABG in LMCA disease, the newly published NOBLE and EXCEL studies, revealed contrasting results. Thus, aim of the present meta-analysis was to review the most robust evidence from randomized comparisons of CABG versus PCI for revascularization of LMCA. Methods: Randomized studies comparing long-term clinical outcomes of CABG or Stent-PCI for the treatment of LMCA disease were searched for in PubMed, the Chochrane Library and Scopus electronic databases. A total of 5 randomized studies were selected, including 4499 patients. Results: No significant difference between CABG and PCI was found in the primary analysis on the composite endpoint of death, stroke and myocardial infarction (OR=106 95% CI 080-140; p=070). Similarly, no differences were observed between CABG and PCI for all-cause death (OR=103 95% CI 081-132; p=081). Although not statistically significant, a lower rate of stroke was registered in the PCI arm (OR=086; p=067), while a lower rate of myocardial infarction was found in the CABG arm (OR=143; p=017). On the contrary, a significantly higher rate of repeat revascularization was registered in the PCI arm (OR=176 95% CI 145-213; p<0001). Conclusions: The present meta-analysis, the most comprehensive and updated to date, including 5 randomized studies and 4499 patients, demonstrates no difference between Stent-PCI and CABG for the treatment of LMCA disease in the composite endpoint of death, stroke and myocardial infarction. Hence, a large part of patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease can be managed equally well by means of both these revascularization strategies.
Long-term outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting versus stent-PCI for unprotected left main disease: A meta-analysis
Polimeni A.;Indolfi C.
2017-01-01
Abstract
Background: Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery has traditionally represented the standard of care for left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. However, percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation (PCI) has more recently emerged as a valuable alternative. The long-time awaited results of the largest randomized trials on the long-term impact of PCI versus CABG in LMCA disease, the newly published NOBLE and EXCEL studies, revealed contrasting results. Thus, aim of the present meta-analysis was to review the most robust evidence from randomized comparisons of CABG versus PCI for revascularization of LMCA. Methods: Randomized studies comparing long-term clinical outcomes of CABG or Stent-PCI for the treatment of LMCA disease were searched for in PubMed, the Chochrane Library and Scopus electronic databases. A total of 5 randomized studies were selected, including 4499 patients. Results: No significant difference between CABG and PCI was found in the primary analysis on the composite endpoint of death, stroke and myocardial infarction (OR=106 95% CI 080-140; p=070). Similarly, no differences were observed between CABG and PCI for all-cause death (OR=103 95% CI 081-132; p=081). Although not statistically significant, a lower rate of stroke was registered in the PCI arm (OR=086; p=067), while a lower rate of myocardial infarction was found in the CABG arm (OR=143; p=017). On the contrary, a significantly higher rate of repeat revascularization was registered in the PCI arm (OR=176 95% CI 145-213; p<0001). Conclusions: The present meta-analysis, the most comprehensive and updated to date, including 5 randomized studies and 4499 patients, demonstrates no difference between Stent-PCI and CABG for the treatment of LMCA disease in the composite endpoint of death, stroke and myocardial infarction. Hence, a large part of patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease can be managed equally well by means of both these revascularization strategies.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
