Shuja Muhammad Hamza, Shakil Firzah, Ali Syed Hassaan, Uddin Qazi Shurjeel, Noman Ayesha, Iqbal Javed, Ahmed Muhammad, Sajid Faiza, Ansari Haya Waseem, Farhan Syed Ahmed, Ansari Huzaifa Ul Haq, Farhan Syed Husain, Nasir Muhammad Moiz, Qazi Sana, Majid Muhammad
Department of Internal Medicine, Dow University of Health Sciences, Pakistan.
Nursing Department Communicable Diseases Centre Hamad Medical Corporation, Doha, Qatar.
Int J Cardiol Cardiovasc Risk Prev. 2025 Jan 9;24:200370. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcrp.2025.200370. eCollection 2025 Mar.
Previous studies suggest similar cardiovascular (CV) benefits for either percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) in patients with left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD). However, limited data exist on the influence of prior cerebrovascular disease (CEVD). Thus, we aim to compare the CV outcomes in patients with LMCAD and prior CEVD, undergoing either PCI or CABG.
A comprehensive search from (January 2000 to August 2024) identified three relevant studies. Outcomes analyzed included all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), myocardial infarction (MI), and risk of stroke in patients undergoing either PCI or CABG for LMCAD. Data analysis employed a random effects model and presented hazard ratios (HR) along with their 95 % confidence intervals (CI).
Three studies involving 760 patients (361 PCI, 399 CABG) were included. PCI was associated with a significantly higher risk of MACCE (HR = 2.56; 95 % CI = 1.23-5.37; p = 0.01; I = 86 %) and MI (HR = 2.97; 95 % CI = 1.72-5.13; p < 0.0001; I = 0 %) compared to CABG. No significant differences were observed in all-cause mortality (HR = 1.35; 95 % CI = 0.92-1.98; p = 0.12; I = 0 %) or recurrent stroke (HR = 0.83; 95 % CI = 0.40-1.70; p = 0.60; I = 1 %). The risk of repeat revascularization was higher in PCI, though not statistically significant (HR = 3.44; 95 % CI = 0.50-23.60; p = 0.21; I = 70 %).
PCI significantly elevates the risk of MACCE and MI in patients with LMCAD and prior CEVD compared to CABG. However, risks of all-cause mortality, repeat stroke, and revascularization were non-significant. Comorbidities may drive the elevated risk, underscoring the need for tailored strategies in this population.
先前的研究表明,对于左主干冠状动脉疾病(LMCAD)患者,经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)或冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)在心血管(CV)方面的获益相似。然而,关于既往脑血管疾病(CEVD)的影响的数据有限。因此,我们旨在比较接受PCI或CABG的LMCAD合并既往CEVD患者的心血管结局。
对2000年1月至2024年8月进行的全面检索,确定了三项相关研究。分析的结局包括接受LMCAD的PCI或CABG治疗的患者的全因死亡率、主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE)、心肌梗死(MI)和中风风险。数据分析采用随机效应模型,并给出风险比(HR)及其95%置信区间(CI)。
纳入了三项涉及760例患者(361例行PCI,399例行CABG)的研究。与CABG相比,PCI与MACCE(HR = 2.56;95%CI = 1.23 - 5.37;p = 0.01;I² = 86%)和MI(HR = 2.97;95%CI = 1.72 - 5.13;p < 0.0001;I² = 0%)的风险显著升高相关。在全因死亡率(HR = 1.35;95%CI = 0.92 - 1.98;p = 0.12;I² = 0%)或复发性中风(HR = 0.83;95%CI = 0.40 - 1.70;p = 0.60;I² = 1%)方面未观察到显著差异。PCI患者再次血运重建的风险较高,尽管无统计学意义(HR = 3.44;95%CI = 0.50 - 23.60;p = 0.21;I² = 70%)。
与CABG相比,PCI显著增加了LMCAD合并既往CEVD患者的MACCE和MI风险。然而,全因死亡率、再次中风和血运重建的风险无显著差异。合并症可能导致风险升高,强调了该人群需要量身定制策略。