CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

MITRA-FR vs. COAPT: Lessons from two trials with diametrically opposed results Single direct oral anticoagulant therapy in stable patients with atrial fibrillation beyond 1 year after coronary stent implantation Current Status and Future Prospects of Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement: JACC State-of-the-Art Review Gut microbiota dysbiosis promotes age-related atrial fibrillation by lipopolysaccharide and glucose-induced activation of NLRP3-inflammasome Detection of Device-Related Thrombosis Following Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion A Comparison Between Cardiac Computed Tomography and Transesophageal Echocardiography​: A Comparison Between Cardiac Computed Tomography and Transesophageal Echocardiography Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion during Cardiac Surgery to Prevent Stroke Role of local coronary blood flow patterns and shear stress on the development of microvascular and epicardial endothelial dysfunction and coronary plaque Management and outcomes of patients with left atrial appendage thrombus prior to percutaneous closure Transseptal puncture versus patent foramen ovale or atrial septal defect access for left atrial appendage closure Rivaroxaban Is Associated With Higher Rates of Gastrointestinal Bleeding Than Other Direct Oral Anticoagulants: A Nationwide Propensity Score–Weighted Study

Review ArticleVolume 73, Issue 8, March 2019

JOURNAL:J Am Coll Cardiol. Article Link

PCI and CABG for Treating Stable Coronary Artery Disease

T Doenst, A Haverich, P Serruys et al. Keywords: heart team; prognosis; survival benefit

ABSTRACT


Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are considered revascularization procedures, but only CABG can prolong life in stable coronary artery disease. Thus, PCI and CABG mechanisms may differ. Viability and/or ischemia detection to guide revascularization have been unable to accurately predict treatment effects of CABG or PCI, questioning a revascularization mechanism for improving survival. By contrast, preventing myocardial infarction may save lives. However, the majority of infarcts are generated by non–flow-limiting stenoses, but PCI is solely focused on treating flow-limiting lesions. Thus, PCI cannot be expected to significantly limit new infarcts, but CABG may do so through providing flow distal to vessel occlusions. All comparisons of CABG to PCI or medical therapy that demonstrate survival effects with CABG also demonstrate infarct reduction. Thus, CABG may differ from PCI by providing “surgical collateralization,” prolonging life by preventing myocardial infarctions. The evidence is reviewed here.