Hueb W A, Bellotti G, de Oliveira S A, Arie S, de Albuquerque C P, Jatene A D, Pileggi F
Heart Institute of the University of São Paulo, Brazil.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995 Dec;26(7):1600-5. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(95)00384-3.
This study sought to evaluate, in a prospective and randomized trial, the relative efficacies of three possible therapeutic strategies for patients with a single severe proximal stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery and stable angina.
Although percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and coronary artery bypass surgery are often performed in patients with a single proximal stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery, it is unclear whether revascularization offers greater clinical benefit than medical therapy alone.
At a single center, 214 patients with stable angina, normal ventricular function and a proximal stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery > 80% were randomly assigned to undergo mammary bypass surgery (n = 70), balloon angioplasty (n = 72) or medical therapy alone (n = 72). Angioplasty had to be considered technically feasible in every case. The predefined primary study end point was the combined incidence of cardiac death, myocardial infarction or refractory angina requiring revascularization.
At an average follow-up period of 3 years, a primary end point had occurred in only 2 patients (3%) assigned to bypass surgery compared with 17 assigned to angioplasty (24%) and 12 assigned to medical therapy (17%) (p = 0.0002, angioplasty vs. bypass surgery; p = 0.006, bypass surgery vs. medical treatment; p = 0.28, angioplasty vs. medical treatment, all by log-rank test). There was no difference in mortality or infarction rates among the groups. However, no patient allocated to bypass surgery needed revascularization, compared with eight and seven patients assigned, respectively, to coronary angioplasty and medical treatment (p = 0.019). Both revascularization techniques resulted in greater symptomatic relief and a lower incidence of ischemia on the treadmill test; however, all three strategies eventually resulted in the abolition of limiting angina.
The more aggressive therapeutic approach with initial bypass surgery for patients with a single severe proximal stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery is associated with a lower incidence of medium-term adverse events than coronary angioplasty or medical treatment. However, all three strategies resulted in a similar incidence of death and infarction during an average follow-up period of 3 years. This information should be taken into consideration when physicians and patients make therapeutic choices in this setting.
本研究旨在通过一项前瞻性随机试验,评估三种可能的治疗策略对左前降支冠状动脉单一严重近端狭窄且患有稳定型心绞痛患者的相对疗效。
尽管经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术和冠状动脉搭桥手术常用于左前降支冠状动脉单一近端狭窄的患者,但目前尚不清楚血运重建是否比单纯药物治疗具有更大的临床益处。
在单一中心,214例患有稳定型心绞痛、心室功能正常且左前降支冠状动脉近端狭窄>80%的患者被随机分配接受乳内动脉搭桥手术(n = 70)、球囊血管成形术(n = 72)或单纯药物治疗(n = 72)。在每种情况下,血管成形术都必须在技术上可行。预先定义的主要研究终点是心脏死亡、心肌梗死或需要血运重建的难治性心绞痛的综合发生率。
在平均3年的随访期内,接受搭桥手术的患者中只有2例(3%)出现了主要终点事件,而接受血管成形术的患者中有17例(24%),接受药物治疗的患者中有12例(17%)(p = 0.0002,血管成形术与搭桥手术相比;p = 0.006,搭桥手术与药物治疗相比;p = 0.28,血管成形术与药物治疗相比,均通过对数秩检验)。各组之间的死亡率或梗死率没有差异。然而,接受搭桥手术的患者中没有一人需要血运重建,而接受冠状动脉成形术和药物治疗的患者分别有8例和7例需要血运重建(p = 0.019)。两种血运重建技术均能带来更大程度的症状缓解,且平板运动试验中缺血发生率更低;然而,所有三种策略最终都能消除限制性心绞痛。
对于左前降支冠状动脉单一严重近端狭窄的患者,采用初始搭桥手术这种更积极的治疗方法与中期不良事件发生率低于冠状动脉成形术或药物治疗相关。然而,在平均3年的随访期内,所有三种策略导致的死亡和梗死发生率相似。在这种情况下,医生和患者做出治疗选择时应考虑这些信息。