CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

左主干支架

科研文章

荐读文献

Comparative effectiveness analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with chronic kidney disease and unprotected left main coronary artery disease Impact of Staging Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Left Main Artery Disease: Insights From the EXCEL Trial New-onset atrial fibrillation after PCI and CABG for left main disease: insights from the EXCEL trial and additional studies Differences between the left main and other bifurcations Impact of Lesion Preparation Strategies on Outcomes of Left Main PCI: The EXCEL Trial Intravascular Imaging and 12-Month Mortality After Unprotected Left Main Stem PCI: An Analysis From the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society Database Contemporary Use and Trends in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States: An Analysis of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Research to Practice Initiative Impact of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on prognosis after percutaneous coronary intervention and bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease: an analysis from the EXCEL trial Long-Term Outcomes After PCI or CABG for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease According to Lesion Location Impact of SYNTAX Score on 10-Year Outcomes After Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

Original Research2009 Mar 5;360(10):961-72.

JOURNAL:N Engl J Med. Article Link

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease

Serruys PW, Morice MC, SYNTAX Investigators.

FULL TEXT PDF


BACKGROUND - Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) involving drug-eluting stents is increasingly used to treat complex coronary artery disease, although coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been the treatment of choice historically. Our trial compared PCI and CABG for treating patients with previously untreated three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease (or both).


METHODS - We randomly assigned 1800 patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease to undergo CABG or PCI (in a 1:1 ratio). For all these patients, the local cardiac surgeon and interventional cardiologist determined that equivalent anatomical revascularization could be achieved with either treatment. A noninferiority comparison of the two groups was performed for the primary end point--a major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (i.e., death from any cause, stroke, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization) during the 12-month period after randomization. Patients for whom only one of the two treatment options would be beneficial, because of anatomical features or clinical conditions, were entered into a parallel, nested CABG or PCI registry.


RESULTS - Most of the preoperative characteristics were similar in the two groups. Rates of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events at 12 months were significantly higher in the PCI group (17.8%, vs. 12.4% for CABG; P=0.002), in large part because of an increased rate of repeat revascularization (13.5% vs. 5.9%, P<0.001); as a result, the criterion for noninferiority was not met. At 12 months, the rates of death and myocardial infarction were similar between the two groups; stroke was significantly more likely to occur with CABG (2.2%, vs. 0.6% with PCI; P=0.003).


CONCLUSIONS - CABG remains the standard of care for patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease, since the use of CABG, as compared with PCI, resulted in lower rates of the combined end point of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events at 1 year. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00114972.)

 

2009 Massachusetts Medical Society