Mina George S, Watti Hussam, Soliman Demiana, Shewale Anand, Atkins Jessica, Reddy Pratap, Dominic Paari
Department of Cardiology, LSUHSC-Shreveport, 1501 Kings Hwy, Shreveport, LA 71103, USA.
LSUHSC-Shreveport, 1501 Kings Hwy, Shreveport, LA 71103, USA.
Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2018 Sep;19(6):671-678. doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.01.003. Epub 2018 Jan 5.
Most data guiding revascularization of multivessel disease (MVD) and/or left main disease (LMD) favor coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) over percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, those data are based on trials comparing CABG to bare metal stents (BMS) or old generation drug eluting stents (OG-DES). Hence, it is essential to outcomes of CABG to those of new generation drug eluting stents (NG-DES).
We searched PUBMED and Cochrane database for trials evaluating revascularization of MVD and/or LMD with CABG and/or PCI. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% credible intervals (CrI). Primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 3-5 years. Secondary outcomes were mortality, cerebrovascular accidents (CVA), myocardial infarction (MI) and repeat revascularization.
We included 10 trials with a total of 9287 patients. CABG was associated with lower MACE when compared to BMS or OG-DES. However, MACE was not significantly different between CABG and NG-DES (OR 0.79, CrI 0.45-1.40). Moreover, there were no significant differences between CABG and NG-DES in mortality (OR 0.78, CrI 0.45-1.37), CVA (OR 0.93 CrI 0.35-2.2) or MI (OR 0.6, CrI 0.17-2.0). On the other hand, CABG was associated with lower repeat revascularization (OR 0.55, CrI 0.36-0.84).
Our study suggests that NG-DES is an acceptable alternative to CABG in patients with MVD and/or LMD. However, repeat revascularization remains to be lower with CABG than with PCI.
大多数指导多支血管疾病(MVD)和/或左主干疾病(LMD)血运重建的数据支持冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)优于经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)。然而,这些数据基于比较CABG与裸金属支架(BMS)或第一代药物洗脱支架(OG-DES)的试验。因此,将CABG的结果与新一代药物洗脱支架(NG-DES)的结果进行比较至关重要。
我们在PUBMED和Cochrane数据库中搜索评估使用CABG和/或PCI对MVD和/或LMD进行血运重建的试验。进行贝叶斯网络荟萃分析以计算比值比(OR)和95%可信区间(CrI)。主要结局是3至5年时的主要不良心血管事件(MACE)。次要结局是死亡率、脑血管意外(CVA)、心肌梗死(MI)和再次血运重建。
我们纳入了10项试验,共9287例患者。与BMS或OG-DES相比,CABG与较低的MACE相关。然而,CABG与NG-DES之间的MACE无显著差异(OR 0.79,CrI 0.45 - 1.40)。此外,CABG与NG-DES在死亡率(OR 0.78,CrI 0.45 - 1.37)、CVA(OR 0.93,CrI 0.35 - 2.2)或MI(OR 0.6,CrI 0.17 - 2.0)方面无显著差异。另一方面,CABG与较低的再次血运重建相关(OR 0.55,CrI 0.36 - 0.84)。
我们的研究表明,在患有MVD和/或LMD的患者中,NG-DES是CABG的可接受替代方案。然而,CABG的再次血运重建率仍低于PCI。