Su Chieh-Shou, Chen Yu-Wei, Shen Ching-Hui, Liu Tsun-Jui, Chang Yen, Lee Wen-Lieng
Cardiovascular Center, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung Institute of Clinical Medicine, and Department of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University School of Medicine, Taipei Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Taichung Veterans General Hospital Chiayi Branch, Chiayi Department of Anesthesiology, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung Department of Surgery Department of Medicine, National Yang Ming University School of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan.
Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Feb;97(7):e9778. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000009778.
Significant unprotected left main (LM) coronary artery disease is frequently associated with severe multivessel disease and increased mortality and morbidity compared with non-LM coronary artery disease. This study compared the clinical outcomes of patients with LM disease who received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting, conventional coronary-artery bypass grafting (C-CABG), and robot-assisted CABG (R-CABG).This retrospective study analyzed 472 consecutive LM disease patients who underwent three different revascularization approaches at a tertiary medical center between January 2005 and November 2013.Of the 472 LM disease patients, 139 received R-CABG, 147 received C-CABG, and 186 received PCI. The need for target vessel revascularization (TVR) was highest in the PCI group. The R-CABG group had significantly lower rates of in-hospital and follow-up all-cause deaths compared with the other 2 groups (1.4% vs. 3.4% and 9.7%, P = .0058; 13.7% vs. 29.3% and 29.6%, P = .0023, respectively). Patients in the R-CABG group had significantly lower rates of intra-aortic balloon pump assistance, and shorter duration of ICU and total hospital stay compared to patients in the C-CABG group. However, revascularization modality, SYNTAX scores, and residual SYNTAX scores were not independent predictors of in-hospital or long-term mortality.In this cohort of LM disease patients treated at a tertiary medical center, PCI is a reasonable choice in patients with less lesion complexity but who are older and have comorbidities. R-CABG is feasible in stable LM disease patients with high SYNTAX scores, and is an effective alternative to C-CABG in LM disease patients with few risk factors. However, revascularization modality per se was not a determinant for long-term mortality in our real-world practice.
与非左主干冠状动脉疾病相比,严重的无保护左主干(LM)冠状动脉疾病常与严重的多支血管疾病相关,且死亡率和发病率更高。本研究比较了接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)并植入支架、传统冠状动脉旁路移植术(C-CABG)和机器人辅助CABG(R-CABG)的LM疾病患者的临床结局。这项回顾性研究分析了2005年1月至2013年11月期间在一家三级医疗中心接受三种不同血运重建方法的472例连续LM疾病患者。在这472例LM疾病患者中,139例接受了R-CABG,147例接受了C-CABG,186例接受了PCI。PCI组靶血管血运重建(TVR)的需求最高。与其他两组相比,R-CABG组的住院和随访全因死亡率显著更低(分别为1.4%对3.4%和9.7%,P = 0.0058;13.7%对29.3%和29.6%,P = 0.0023)。与C-CABG组患者相比,R-CABG组患者主动脉内球囊泵辅助的发生率显著更低,重症监护病房(ICU)住院时间和总住院时间更短。然而,血运重建方式、SYNTAX评分和残余SYNTAX评分并非住院或长期死亡率的独立预测因素。在这家三级医疗中心接受治疗的这组LM疾病患者中,PCI对于病变复杂性较低但年龄较大且有合并症的患者是一个合理选择。R-CABG对于SYNTAX评分高的稳定LM疾病患者是可行的,并且在危险因素较少的LM疾病患者中是C-CABG的有效替代方案。然而,在我们的实际临床实践中,血运重建方式本身并非长期死亡率的决定因素。