CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Timing of intervention in asymptomatic patients with valvular heart disease Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial Late kidney injury after transcatheter aortic valve replacement Effect of Luseogliflozin on Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus Impact of the Use of Intravascular Imaging on Patients Who Underwent Orbital Atherectomy Circulating sST2 and catestatin levels in patients with acute worsening of heart failure: a report from the CATSTAT-HF study Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in Inotrope-Dependent Heart Failure Patients - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Adjunctive Cilostazol to Dual Antiplatelet Therapy to Enhance Mobilization of Endothelial Progenitor Cell in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled EPISODE Trial Attenuated plaque detected by intravascular ultrasound: clinical, angiographic, and morphologic features and post-percutaneous coronary intervention complications in patients with acute coronary syndromes Circadian Cadence and NR1D1 Tune Cardiovascular Disease

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.