Coronary Revascularisation in Patients Eligible Only for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting - A Review with a Specific Focus on the Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery Nested

Login or register to view PDF.
Citation
ICR - Volume 7 Issue 2 - Autumn 2012;2012:7(2):91-4
DOI
http://dx.doi.org/10.15420/icr.2012.7.2.91

Abstract

In many patients, comparable results can be achieved either with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The comparison of PCI versus CABG is frequently reported in randomised trials, national registries, multicentre collaborations and single-centre experiences. However, the patients included in these analyses are either highly selected (trials), or comprehensive (national registries and retrospective studies). Large registries differ from each other since indications for PCI or CABG may be different among geographic regions, hence the large PCI:CABG ratio variability that has been described. Some patients can only undergo bypass surgery because they have too complex coronary artery disease deemed unsuitable to be treated with PCI. In contrast, PCI can be the only treatment option if patients are deemed inoperable due to advanced age or severe co-morbidities. Separate analyses of these patients that are excluded from randomisation is needed to fully understand the strength, limitations and outcomes of PCI and CABG in selected patients. This review summarises the data of patients ineligible for randomisation and focuses specifically on the Synergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with Taxus and cardiac surgery (SYNTAX) PCI and CABG nested registries.

To view the full article in PDF or eBook formats, please click on the icons above.

References
  1. Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) principal investigators and associates, Coronary artery surgery study (CASS): a randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Survival data, Circulation, 1983;68:939–50.
    Crossref
  2. Yusuf S, Zucker D, Peduzzi P, et al., Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists Collaboration, Lancet, 1994;344:563–70.
    Crossref | PubMed
  3. Hassan A, Newman A, Ko DT, et al., Increasing rates of angioplasty versus bypass surgery in Canada, 1994-2005, Am Heart J, 2010;160:958–65.
    Crossref | PubMed
  4. Brownlee S, Wennberg J, Barry M, et al., Improving patient decision-making in health care: a 2011 Dartmouth Atlas report highlighting Minnesota. Available at: www.dartmouthatlas.org/downloads/reports/Decision_ making_report_022411.pdf (accessed 2 January 2012).
  5. Head SJ, Bogers AJ, Serruys PW, et al., A crucial factor in shared decision making: the team approach, Lancet, 2011;377:1836.
    Crossref | PubMed
  6. Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, et al., Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease, N Engl J Med, 2009;360:961–72.
    Crossref | PubMed
  7. Head SJ, Holmes Jr DR, Mack MJ, et al., Risk Profile and 3-Year Outcomes from the SYNTAX Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Nested Registries, JACC Cardiovasc Interv, 2012;5(6):618–25.
    Crossref | PubMed
  8. Hlatky MA, Boothroyd DB, Bravata DM, et al., Coronary artery bypass surgery compared with percutaneous coronary interventions for multivessel disease: a collaborative analysis of individual patient data from ten randomised trials, Lancet, 2009;373:1190–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  9. Bravata DM, Gienger AL, McDonald KM, et al., Systematic review: the comparative effectiveness of percutaneous coronary interventions and coronary artery bypass graft surgery, Ann Intern Med, 2007;147:703–16.
    Crossref | PubMed
  10. King SB, 3rd, Barnhart HX, Kosinski AS, et al., Angioplasty or surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease: comparison of eligible registry and randomized patients in the EAST trial and influence of treatment selection on outcomes. Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial Investigators, Am J Cardiol, 1997;79:1453–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  11. Feit F, Brooks MM, Sopko G, et al., Long-term clinical outcome in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation Registry: comparison with the randomized trial. BARI Investigators, Circulation, 2000;101:2795–802.
    Crossref | PubMed
  12. Capodanno D, Tamburino C, Integrating the Synergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score into practice: use, pitfalls, and new directions, Am Heart J, 2011;161:462–70.
    Crossref | PubMed
  13. Kappetein AP, Feldman TE, Mack MJ, et al., Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with drug-eluting stenting for the treatment of left main and/or three-vessel disease: 3-year follow-up of the SYNTAX trial, Eur Heart J, 2011;32:2125–34.
    Crossref | PubMed
  14. Morrison DA, Sethi G, Sacks J, et al., Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass graft surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: The VA AWESOME multicenter registry: comparison with the randomized clinical trial, J Am Coll Cardiol, 2002;39:266–73.
    Crossref | PubMed
  15. Mohr FW, Rastan AJ, Serruys PW, et al., Complex coronary anatomy in coronary artery bypass graft surgery: impact of complex coronary anatomy in modern bypass surgery? Lessons learned from the SYNTAX trial after two years, J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2011;141:130–40.
    Crossref | PubMed
  16. Park DW, Kim YH, Song HG, et al., Long-term comparison of drug-eluting stents and coronary artery bypass grafting for multivessel coronary revascularization: 5-year outcomes from the Asan Medical Center-Multivessel Revascularization Registry, J Am Coll Cardiol, 2011;57:128–37.
    Crossref | PubMed
  17. Lee MS, Kapoor N, Jamal F, et al., Comparison of coronary artery bypass surgery with percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery disease, J Am Coll Cardiol, 2006;47:864–70.
    Crossref | PubMed
  18. Rodes-Cabau J, Deblois J, Bertrand OF, et al., Nonrandomized comparison of coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery disease in octogenarians, Circulation, 2008;118:2374–81.
    Crossref | PubMed
  19. Jensen LO, Kaltoft A, Thayssen P, et al., Outcome in high risk patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis treated with percutaneous coronary intervention, Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2010;75:101–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  20. Ghenim R, Roncalli J, Tidjane AM, et al., One-year follow-up of nonrandomized comparison between coronary artery bypass grafting surgery and drug-eluting stent for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery disease in elderly patients (aged >or=75 years), J Interv Cardiol, 2009;22:520–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  21. van Gameren M, Piazza N, Bogers AJ, et al., How to assess risks of valve surgery: quality, implementation and future of risk models, Heart, 2009;95:1958–63.
    Crossref | PubMed
  22. Park DW, Kim YH, Yun SC, et al., Complexity of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease and long-term outcomes in patients with unprotected left main disease treated with drug-eluting stents or coronary artery bypass grafting, J Am Coll Cardiol, 2011;57:2152–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  23. Serruys P, Morice M, Kappetein A, et al., Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease, N Engl J Med, 2009;360:961–72.
    Crossref | PubMed
  24. Lemesle G, Bonello L, de Labriolle A, et al., Prognostic value of the Syntax score in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting for three-vessel coronary artery disease, Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2009;73:612–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  25. Birim O, van Gameren M, Bogers AJ, et al., Complexity of coronary vasculature predicts outcome of surgery for left main disease, Ann Thorac Surg, 2009;87:1097–104; discussion 104–5.
    Crossref | PubMed
  26. Capodanno D, Capranzano P, Di Salvo ME, et al., Usefulness of SYNTAX score to select patients with left main coronary artery disease to be treated with coronary artery bypass graft, JACC Cardiovasc Interv, 2009;2:731–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  27. Park SJ, Kim YH, Park DW, et al., Randomized Trial of Stents versus Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease, N Engl J Med, 2011;364:1718–27.
    Crossref | PubMed
  28. Chakravarty T, Buch MH, Naik H, et al., Predictive accuracy of SYNTAX score for predicting long-term outcomes of unprotected left main coronary artery revascularization, Am J Cardiol, 2011;107:360–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  29. Carnero-Alcazar M, Maroto Castellanos LC, Silva Guisasola JA, et al., SYNTAX Score is associated with worse outcomes after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting surgery for three-vessel or left main complex coronary disease, J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2011;142:e123–32.
    Crossref | PubMed