CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

New technologies for intensive prevention programs after myocardial infarction: rationale and design of the NET-IPP trial Defining Staged Procedures for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Trials A Guidance Document Cardiac Sympathetic Denervation for Refractory Ventricular Arrhythmias Oxidative Stress and Cardiovascular Risk: Obesity, Diabetes, Smoking, and Pollution: Part 3 of a 3-Part Series De-escalation of antianginal medications after successful chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention: Frequency and relationship with health status The association between body mass index and obesity with survival in pulmonary arterial hypertension Short Duration of DAPT Versus De-Escalation After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Coronary Syndromes Prospective Elimination of Distal Coronary Sinus to Left Atrial Connection for Atrial Fibrillation Ablation (PRECAF) Randomized Controlled Trial Left Ventricular Assist Device as a Bridge to Recovery for Patients With Advanced Heart Failure Sex-Specific Thresholds of High-Sensitivity Troponin in Patients With Suspected Acute Coronary Syndrome

Clinical Trial2015 May 26;65(20):2198-206.

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

Randomized Trial of Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: 5-Year Outcomes of the PRECOMBAT Study

Ahn JM, Roh JH, Park SJ et al. Keywords: coronary artery bypass grafting; long-term outcome; percutaneous coronary intervention

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUNDIn a previous randomized trial, we found that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was not inferior to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis at 1 year.


OBJECTIVESThis study sought to determine the 5-year outcomes of PCI compared with CABG for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis.

METHODSWe randomly assigned 600 patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis to undergo PCI with a sirolimus-eluting stent (n = 300) or CABG (n = 300). The primary endpoint was a major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (MACCE: a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization) and compared on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS At 5 years, MACCE occurred in 52 patients in the PCI group and 42 patients in the CABG group (cumulative event rates of 17.5% and 14.3%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84 to 1.90; p = 0.26). The 2 groups did not differ significantly in terms of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or stroke as well as their composite (8.4% and 9.6%; HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.52; p = 0.66). Ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization occurred more frequently in the PCI group than in the CABG group (11.4% and 5.5%, respectively; HR: 2.11; 95% CI: 1.16 to 3.84; p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONSDuring 5 years of follow-up, our study did not show significant difference regarding the rate of MACCE between patients who underwent PCI with a sirolimus-eluting stent and those who underwent CABG. However, considering the limited power of our study, our results should be interpreted with caution. (Bypass Surgery Versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease [PRECOMBAT]; NCT00422968).

Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.