A meta-analysis of randomized control trials comparing minimally invasive direct coronary bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention for stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending artery

Alternative Approaches to Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, How Do They Compare?: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a leading cause of mortality worldwide. Severe symptomatic CAD is treated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Alternative CABG (ACABG) approaches including thoracotomy, off-pump, total endoscopic, and robotic-assisted CABG are increasing in prevalence to address the increased early risk of CABG. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to review the contemporary literature comparing outcomes after ACABG and PCI. Pubmed, Medline, and Embase were systematically searched by 2 authors for articles comparing the outcomes after ACABG and PCI. A total of 1154 articles were screened, and 11 were included in this review. The RevMan 5.4 software was used to perform a meta-analysis of the pooled data. Individual studies found rates of long-term survival, major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), myocardial infarction (MI), and repeat revascularization either favored ACABG or did not differ significantly. Pooled estimates of the compiled data identified rates of MACCE, MI, and repeat revascularization favored ACABG. The results of this review demonstrated the favorable rates of long-term mortality, MACCE, MI, and repeat revascularization for ACABG in addition to similar short-term mortality and stroke when compared with PCI. Advancement of both CABG and PCI continues to improve patient outcomes. With the increasing prevalence of ACABG, similar studies will need to be undertaken with further direct comparisons between ACABG and PCI. Finally, hybrid revascularization should continue to be explored for its combined benefits of long-term outcomes, short-term safety, and ability to achieve complete revascularization.

Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Sixteen Years of Single-Center Experience

Background: Coronary artery disease is a major cause of death globally. Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB), using a small left anterior thoracotomy, aims to provide a less invasive alternative to traditional procedures, potentially improving patient outcomes with reduced recovery times. Methods: This retrospective, non-randomized study analyzed 310 patients who underwent MIDCAB between July 1999 and April 2022. Data were collected on demographics, clinical characteristics, operative and postoperative outcomes, and follow-up mortality and morbidity. Statistical analysis was conducted using IBM SPSS, with survival curves generated via the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The cohort had a mean age of 63.3 ± 10.9 years, with 30.6% females. The majority of surgeries were elective (76.1%), with an average operating time of 129.7 ± 35.3 min. The median rate of intraoperative blood transfusions was 0.0 (CI 0.0-2.0) Units. The mean in-hospital stay was 8.7 ± 5.5 days, and the median ICU stay was just one day. Early postoperative complications were minimal, with a 0.64% in-hospital mortality rate. The 6-month and 1-year mortalities were 0.97%, with a 10-year survival rate of 94.3%. There were two cases of perioperative myocardial infarction and no instances of stroke or new onset dialysis. Conclusions: The MIDCAB approach demonstrates significant benefits in terms of patient recovery and long-term outcomes, offering a viable and effective alternative for patients suitable for less invasive procedures. Our results suggest that MIDCAB is a safe option with favorable survival rates, justifying its consideration in high-volume centers focused on minimally invasive techniques.

Minimally invasive and robotic coronary artery bypass grafting-a 25-year review

During the mid-1990s cardiac surgery started exploring minimally invasive methods for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and has over a 25-year period developed highly differentiated and less traumatic operations. Instead of the traditional sternotomy mini-incisions on the chest or ports are placed, surgery on the beating heart is applied, sophisticated remote access heart lung machine systems as well as videoscopic units are available, and robotic technology enables completely endoscopic approaches. This review describes these methods, reports on the cumulative intra- and postoperative outcome of these procedures, and gives an integrated view on what less invasive coronary bypass surgery can achieve. A total of 74 patient series published on the topic between 1996 and 2019 were reviewed. Six main versions of minimal access and robotically assisted CABG were applied in 11,135 patients. On average 1.3±0.6 grafts were placed and the operative time was 3 hours 42 min ± 1 hour 15 min. The procedures were carried out with a hospital mortality of 1.0% and a stroke rate of 0.6%. The revision rate for bleeding was 2.5% and a renal failure rate of 0.9% was noted. Wound infections occurred at a rate of 1.2% and postoperative hospital stay was 5.6±2.2 days. It can be concluded that less invasive and robotically assisted versions of coronary bypass grafting are carried out with an adequate safety level while surgical trauma is significantly reduced.

Minimally invasive coronary surgery

Minimally invasive options for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery progressed dramatically in the last decades. Minimally invasive CABG surgery is presented trough these forms: minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB), endoscopic atraumatic coronary artery bypass (EndoACAB), robot-assisted direct coronary artery bypass (RADCAB), total endoscopic coronary artery bypass (TECAB), and hybrid coronary revascularisation (HCR). Unfortunately, these are still limited only to the specialised centres across the world and have not been accepted by the majority of cardiac surgeons. A surgeon who is starting to practice minimally invasive CABG surgery needs to be ready for long duration of the interventions, higher rate of conversions to sternotomy and significant learning curve. Excellent results that have been published on the subject of minimally invasive revascularisation methods support the potential of these alternative approaches to evolve in the near future.

Revascularization for Isolated Proximal Left Anterior Descending Artery Disease

BACKGROUND

Most studies of patients with isolated proximal left anterior descending (PLAD) coronary artery disease do not include all 3 procedural options: percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), conventional coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, or minimally invasive CABG.

METHODS

New York's cardiac registries were used to identify patients who underwent revascularization for isolated PLAD disease between January 1, 2010, and November 30, 2016, in New York State. After exclusions, 14,327 patients, of whom 13,115 received PCI, 1001 of whom underwent CABG surgery, and 211 of whom underwent minimally invasive CABG were monitored through the end of 2017 to compare outcomes. Registry data were matched to vital statistics data to obtain deaths occurring after discharge and matched to claims data to obtain subsequent admissions for myocardial infarction and stroke.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in mortality or in mortality/myocardial infarction/stroke after 7 years (with median follow-up times in excess of 4 years) among the 3 procedures after adjusting for differences in patient risk factors. However, conventional CABG surgery was associated with a lower subsequent revascularization rate than PCI (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% confidence interval, 0.35-0.58) and minimally invasive CABG surgery (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.66).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with isolated PLAD disease undergoing any of 3 revascularization options (PCI, conventional CABG surgery, or minimally invasive CABG surgery), conventional CABG surgery was associated with lower subsequent revascularization rates, but there were no differences in mortality or mortality/myocardial infarction/stroke rates.

Total arterial multivessels minimal invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting via left minithoracotomy

BACKGROUND

Minimal Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery (MIDCAB) is becoming popular and an important armamentarium for cardiac surgeons. We aimed to evaluate the result of MIDCAB total arterial revascularization.

METHODS

We have evaluated 216 patients who underwent MIDCAB multivessel total arterial revascularization through a left anterolateral mini thoracotomy. LIMA harvested in every patient, RIMA or radial artery used as second conduit. LIMA-RIMA Y or LIMA-RADIAL Y was made to accomplish multivessels total arterial revascularization. Post-operative graft patency was evaluated in all patients by CT coronary angiography at 6 months following discharge.

RESULTS

Mean age of patients was 52.5 ± 9.8 years. Average number of anastomosis performed were 2.34 ± 0.75. Multivessels total arterial CABG was accomplished in all individuals. There was no mortality or deep wound infection. Re-exploration was done in two patients for bleeding. In one patient emergency CPB was required. Average ICU and hospital stay was 1.52 ± 0.77 and 4.92 ± 1.46 days, respectively. Patients were mobilized earlier due to less pain. Wound healing of anterolateral thoracotomy was faster. In the follow up CT angiography 100% of the LIMA grafts were patent.

CONCLUSIONS

Multivessels total arterial MIDCAB can be accomplished safely in selected individuals. RIMA can be harvested in long standing diabetic patients with no concern for sternal wound healing. MIDCAB patients experience better cosmetics and early return to daily activities.

Proximal Left Anterior Descending Artery Treatment Using a Bioresorbable Polymer Coating Sirolimus-Eluting Stent: Real-World Outcomes From the Multicenter Prospective e-Ultimaster Registry

Background Guidelines recommend heart team discussion and coronary artery bypass graft consideration in patients with proximal left anterior descending (LAD) artery stenosis. Evidence suggests that outcomes of proximal LAD angioplasty might not differ from treatment of nonproximal LAD locations. We aim to determine clinical outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the proximal LAD segment in comparison with nonproximal LAD angioplasty, using a thin-strut drug-eluting stent. Methods and Results In this analysis of the e-Ultimaster registry, patients undergoing angioplasty in the proximal LAD territory were compared with those treated in nonproximal LAD locations. Multivariate analysis and propensity score were used to adjust for differences among the groups. The primary outcome was target lesion failure: a composite of cardiac death, target-lesion-related myocardial infarction, and/or clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up. Of the 17 805 patients (mean age, 64.2±11; 76% male), 5452 (30.6%) underwent proximal LAD and 12 353 (69.4%) nonproximal LAD percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients in the proximal LAD group had more multivessel disease (48.7% versus 43.5%; P<0.001) and 2-fold more bifurcations lesions (18.8% versus 9.2%; P<0.0001). After propensity-weighted adjustment, target lesion failure did not differ between the groups (3.3% versus 2.9%; P=0.17 for proximal LAD versus nonproximal LAD angioplasty, respectively). In multivariate analysis, proximal LAD treatment was not an independent predictor of target lesion failure (odds ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.88-1.31; P=0.48). Conclusions At 1-year follow-up, patients had similar clinical outcomes independent of stenting location, questioning whether proximal LAD treatment should be regarded differently from stenting in any other coronary artery territory.

Comparison of Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents for Coronary Artery Disease - Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Some studies comparing minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have reported MIDCAB's superiority, but they did not investigate contemporary PCI with newer generation drug-eluting stents (DES). We compared clinical outcomes after MIDCAB with previously reported outcomes after PCI with second-generation DES.Methods and Results:We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients treated with MIDCAB. Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes after MIDCAB were compared with those for left anterior descending artery disease treated via PCI. The primary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and target vessel revascularization (TVR). A propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis was conducted to adjust for between-group differences in baseline characteristics. We analyzed 77 patients treated with MIDCAB and 2,206 treated with PCI. The MIDCAB group was older and had more severe coronary disease and a higher incidence of left ventricular dysfunction. Over a 3-year follow-up, the PCI group had favorable MACCE outcomes. After PSM, there were no between-group differences in MACCE (MIDCAB, 15.6% vs. PCI, 23.4%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% CI: 0.38-1.68, P=0.548) or TVR (MIDCAB, 2.6% vs. PCI, 5.2%; HR, 0.51; 95% CI: 0.10-3.09, P=0.509).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical outcomes were similar between MIDCAB and PCI using second-generation DES over 3 years of follow-up.

Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention of the LAD: costs and long-term outcome

OBJECTIVE

Outcomes and treatment costs for coronary artery disease involving the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) are influenced by the type of treatment, which can be either isolated minimally invasive revascularization of the LAD using the internal thoracic artery (ITA) (MIDCAB) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on the LAD. This retrospective study sought to evaluate long-term survival, freedom from re-intervention and cost analysis after MIDCAB compared to PCI on the LAD.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2012, from a total of 561 patients, 106 consecutive patients with LAD stenosis underwent a MIDCAB procedure whereas 100 patients underwent elective PCI. Urgent and emergent cases were excluded from the present study (n = 355). Detailed analysis of the outcome data was performed for both groups. A Kaplan-Meier survival estimation with up to 10-year follow-up was applied for both groups for survival analysis and freedom from re-intervention.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in terms of clinically relevant baseline characteristics. The outcome in the MIDCAB group was superior regarding long-term overall survival, accounting for 100% versus 92.8% at 1 year, 98.5% versus 82.1% at 6 years and 79.6% versus 61.5% at 10 years (Log Rank (Mantel-Cox) p = 0.011) and freedom from re-intervention at 10 years (97.2% vs. 86.7%, Log Rank (Mantel-Cox) p = 0.001). Intensive care unit (ICU) stay (p = 0.020) and total hospital stay (p<0.001) were significantly longer in the MIDCAB group, which was also associated with higher in-hospital costs (10,879 € vs. 4009 €, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas patients undergoing MIDCAB remained longer on ICU and in hospital, causing higher costs, this procedure was associated with a significantly lower incidence of repeat revascularization and significantly lower mortality compared to PCI on the LAD.

Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting

Minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS)-CABG is a technique that at its core has patient comfort, early return to routine activities, meeting patient expectations for less invasive options, and maintaining the highest possible standards of care and outcomes. The technique requires not only surgical dexterity but also integration of significant technological advancements in patient care. At a time when percutaneous interventions are often prescribed on the pretext of increased patient comfort and demand, minimally invasive myocardial revascularization becomes even more relevant. Minimally invasive myocardial revascularization is ever evolving and encompasses both small-incision open techniques as well as endoscopic-assisted procedures. The success of the procedure depends not only on the learning curve and familiarity with the technology but also on appropriate patient selection. Mere feasibility of the technique is not sufficient, and the results have to be comparable with the long-established techniques of conventional coronary artery bypass grafting both in terms of early morbidity and mortality as well as long-term outcomes. In this review, we discuss patient selection and technical aspects of minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting. We also provide an evidence-based comparison to early and long-term outcomes with conventional coronary artery bypass grafting. Finally, we review the uptake and outcomes of minimally invasive revascularization in the Indian subcontinent.

Short-term clinical outcomes and long-term survival of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting

Background

Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) grafting is regarded as an alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) through full sternotomy, particularly for patients with isolated proximal left anterior descending (LAD) artery stenosis deemed unsuitable for percutaneous coronary intervention. However, the technically demanding nature of the procedure and lack of long-term published outcomes have precluded its universal adoption. We report the comparative short-term outcomes and long-term survival of MIDCAB and conventional CABG through full sternotomy for grafting of isolated LAD.

Methods

From February 1996 to October 2017, a total of 668 patients underwent MIDCAB (n=508) and full sternotomy (n=160) CABG for isolated proximal LAD stenosis. Their data were prospectively entered into the institutional cardiac surgery database (Patients Analysis & Tracking System; Dendrite Clinical Systems, Ltd, Oxford, England, United Kingdom) and analyzed retrospectively. Information on patient deaths was obtained from the institutional database and the National General Register Office for all patients.

Results

The two groups were comparable with respect to preoperative demographics and risk profile. MIDCAB was associated with longer operative time (177±32 versus 141±12 min; P=0.003). The two groups did not significantly differ with regard to other complications including operative mortality. At a mean follow-up of 12.95±0.47 years, survival was also similar.

Conclusions

This large single centre study with longest follow-up validates the status of MIDCAB as an effective strategy for grafting of LAD. However, it fails to show superiority of the minimally invasive approach compared to conventional CABG through full sternotomy.

Comparison of Outcomes of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Using Internal Mammary Graft Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Isolated Proximal Left Anterior Descending Narrowing

There are limited contemporary studies comparing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for isolated proximal left anterior descending (LAD) disease. Increasing stent length and decreasing stent diameters are associated with increased risk of restenosis and adverse outcomes after PCI. Whether these parameters influence outcomes when comparing CABG and PCI is unclear. We compared CABG and PCI in 3,473 patients who underwent revascularization for isolated proximal LAD disease from 2004 to 2015 at Harefield Hospital, UK; 3,078 patients (89%) had PCI and 384 patients had CABG (11%). We analyzed all-cause mortality at 3 years. The unadjusted mortality rates were similar (PCI vs CABG: 9.5% vs 7.0%, p = 0.109). PCI was associated with comparable mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70 to 1.89, p = 0.593), even when stratified to bare-metal stents (HR 1.58, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.80, p = 0.121); first-generation drug-eluting stents (FDES; HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.02, p = 0.597); and second-generation DES (SDES; HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.82, p = 0.946). Stent diameters did not influence outcomes, but PCI was associated with higher mortality when stent length ≥30 mm (HR 2.12, 95% CI 1.12 to 4.03, p = 0.022). There was a linear association between stent length and mortality, and for every 1-mm increase in stent length, the 3-year mortality increased by 0.32%. In conclusion, for patients with isolated proximal LAD disease, PCI and CABG were associated with similar mortality. Increasing stent length was progressively associated with worse outcomes with PCI. For longer segments of disease requiring stent lengths ≥30 mm, CABG may be associated with better outcomes.

A simultaneous minimally invasive approach to treat a patient with coronary artery disease and metastatic lung cancer

Concurrent lung cancer and coronary artery disease requiring treatment with percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting is not rare. An individualized perioperative anticoagulation regimen and minimal surgical trauma will benefit the patient’s postoperative recovery. We successfully treated a 68-year-old female patient with a lesion in the left anterior descending artery and metastatic right lung carcinoma by simultaneous minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting via a small left thoracotomy and thoracoscopic wedge resection of the lung lesion. She recovered and was discharged on the eighth postoperative day. The patient showed no symptoms of myocardial ischemia postoperatively. Computed tomography scan did not indicate metastatic lesion of lung carcinoma at 1-year follow-up. In conclusion, minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting combined with thoracoscopic wedge resection is an effective minimally invasive treatment for concurrent lung cancer and coronary artery disease. This technique eliminates the risk of perioperative bleeding and provides satisfactory mid-term follow-up results.

Minimally invasive direct coronary bypass compared with percutaneous coronary intervention for left anterior descending artery disease: a meta-analysis

Background

The clinical outcomes for left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery lesion between minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are still controversial. The objective was to compare safety and efficacy between MIDCAB and PCI for LAD.

Methods

Electronic databases and article references were systematically searched to access relevant studies. End points included mortality, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization (TVR), major adverse coronary events (MACE), angina recurrence, and stroke.

Results

Fourteen studies with 941 patients were finally involved in the present study. The mortality and incidence of myocardial infarction were similar in MIDCAB and PCI groups at 30 days, 6 months, and at follow-up beyond 1 year. Compared with PCI, MIDCAB decreased incidence of TVR and MACE at 6 months and beyond 1 year follow-up. MIDCAB was associated with a lower incidence of angina recurrence at 6 months compared with PCI. PCI was associated with higher risk of restenosis in target vessel. No significant difference was shown for stroke.

Conclusion

Our meta-analysis indicates that there are no significant differences in the safety between MIDCAB and PCI in patients with LAD. However MIDCAB is superior to PCI for TVR and MACE.

Clinical Outcomes of Revascularization Strategies for Patients With MVD/LMCA Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR), a new minimally invasive procedure for patients requiring revascularization for multivessel coronary lesions, combines coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left anterior descending (LAD) lesions and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non-LAD coronary lesions. However, available data related to outcomes comparing the 3 revascularization therapies is limited to small studies.We conducted a search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library of Controlled Trials up to December 31, 2014, without language restriction. A total of 16 randomized trials (n=4858 patients) comparing HCR versus PCI or off-pump CABG (OPCAB) were included in this meta-analysis. The primary outcomes were major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), cerebrovascular events (CVE), and target vessel revascularization (TVR). Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effect and fixed-effect models. Ranking probabilities were used to calculate a summary numerical value: the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve.No significant differences were seen between the HCR and PCI in short term (in hospital and 30 days) with regard to MACCE (odds ratio [OR] = 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00-2.35), all-cause death (OR = 2.09, 95% CI 0.34-7.66), MI (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.19-2.95), CVE (OR = 4.45, 95% CI 0.39-19.16), and TVR (OR = 6.99, 95% CI 0.17-39.39). However, OPCAB had lower MACCE than HCR (OR = 0.19, 95% CI 0.00-0.95). In midterm (1 year and 3 year), in comparison with HCR, PCI had higher all-cause death (OR = 5.66, 95% CI 0.00-13.88) and CVE (OR = 4.40, 95% CI 0.01-5.68), and lower MI (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.00-2.86), TVR (OR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.05-2.26), and thus the MACCE (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.00-2.35). Off-pump CABG presented a better outcome than HCR with significant lower MACCE (OR = 0.17, 95% CI 0.01-0.68). Surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities showed that HCR may be the superior strategy for MVD and LMCA disease when regarded to MACCE (SUCRA = 0.84), MI (SUCRA = 0.76) in short term, and regarded to MACCE (SUCRA = 0.99), MI (SUCRA = 0.94), and CVE (SUCRA = 0.92) in midterm.Hybrid coronary revascularization seemed to be a feasible and acceptable option for treatment of LMCA disease and MVD. More powerful evidences are required to precisely evaluate risks and benefits of the 3 therapies for patients who have different clinical characteristics.

A multistudy analysis investigating systematic differences in cardiovascular trial results between Europe and Asia

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether there are differences in the results of cardiovascular trials between Europe and Asia using data from an extensive collection of randomised controlled trials.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

All meta-analyses containing randomised controlled trials (RCT's) for the treatment or prevention of cardiovascular diseases were searched for in The Cochrane Library (2000-2008) and MEDLINE (2005-2008). Analysis was then conducted within and over each meta-analysis which satisfied given criteria. Separate estimates of treatment effect were calculated for Europe and Asia in each meta-analysis and then compared. Estimates of a common inter-continental difference over all meta-analyses were also calculated and meta-regression was performed. This was performed for both fatal and non-fatal end points.

RESULTS

The literature search identified 59 meta-analyses that satisfied the inclusion criteria. After exclusion, the number of meta-analyses reporting greater effect sizes in Asia than in Europe was significantly more than would be expected by chance (fatal 12/14, p=0.013; non-fatal 23/32, p=0.020).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides some evidence that for cardiovascular interventions treatment effect estimation differs between Europe and Asia, with respect to both fatal and non-fatal end points.

Percutaneous coronary invervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with coronary artery disease.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central were searched, and randomized controlled trials were included. Outcomes were assessed at maximum available follow-up.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis includes 31 trials with 15,004 patients. As regards death, more patients died after PCI compared with CABG across all types of patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-1.3; P = .05) as well as in patients with multivessel disease (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.0-1.4; P = .02) or diabetes (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.1; P < .01). Myocardial infarction occurred as frequently after PCI (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.9-1.5; P = .28). Repeat revascularization was more common after PCI (OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 3.5-5.8; P < .01), with a progressive decline in ORs from the pre-stent era (OR, 7.0; 95% CI, 5.1-9.7; P < .01), to the bare metal stent era (OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 3.6-5.5; P < .01), and to the drug-eluting stent era (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.8-3.4; P < .01). Stroke was more common after CABG (OR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9; P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with PCI, CABG had a lower risk of death in multivessel disease or diabetes patients eligible for either intervention, a lower risk of repeat revascularization, but a higher risk of stroke.

Revascularisation versus medical treatment in patients with stable coronary artery disease: network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether revascularisation improves prognosis compared with medical treatment among patients with stable coronary artery disease.

DESIGN

Bayesian network meta-analyses to combine direct within trial comparisons between treatments with indirect evidence from other trials while maintaining randomisation.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

A strategy of initial medical treatment compared with revascularisation by coronary artery bypass grafting or Food and Drug Administration approved techniques for percutaneous revascularization: balloon angioplasty, bare metal stent, early generation paclitaxel eluting stent, sirolimus eluting stent, and zotarolimus eluting (Endeavor) stent, and new generation everolimus eluting stent, and zotarolimus eluting (Resolute) stent among patients with stable coronary artery disease.

DATA SOURCES

Medline and Embase from 1980 to 2013 for randomised trials comparing medical treatment with revascularisation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

All cause mortality.

RESULTS

100 trials in 93,553 patients with 262,090 patient years of follow-up were included. Coronary artery bypass grafting was associated with a survival benefit (rate ratio 0.80, 95% credibility interval 0.70 to 0.91) compared with medical treatment. New generation drug eluting stents (everolimus: 0.75, 0.59 to 0.96; zotarolimus (Resolute): 0.65, 0.42 to 1.00) but not balloon angioplasty (0.85, 0.68 to 1.04), bare metal stents (0.92, 0.79 to 1.05), or early generation drug eluting stents (paclitaxel: 0.92, 0.75 to 1.12; sirolimus: 0.91, 0.75 to 1.10; zotarolimus (Endeavor): 0.88, 0.69 to 1.10) were associated with improved survival compared with medical treatment. Coronary artery bypass grafting reduced the risk of myocardial infarction compared with medical treatment (0.79, 0.63 to 0.99), and everolimus eluting stents showed a trend towards a reduced risk of myocardial infarction (0.75, 0.55 to 1.01). The risk of subsequent revascularisation was noticeably reduced by coronary artery bypass grafting (0.16, 0.13 to 0.20) followed by new generation drug eluting stents (zotarolimus (Resolute): 0.26, 0.17 to 0.40; everolimus: 0.27, 0.21 to 0.35), early generation drug eluting stents (zotarolimus (Endeavor): 0.37, 0.28 to 0.50; sirolimus: 0.29, 0.24 to 0.36; paclitaxel: 0.44, 0.35 to 0.54), and bare metal stents (0.69, 0.59 to 0.81) compared with medical treatment.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with stable coronary artery disease, coronary artery bypass grafting reduces the risk of death, myocardial infarction, and subsequent revascularisation compared with medical treatment. All stent based coronary revascularisation technologies reduce the need for revascularisation to a variable degree. Our results provide evidence for improved survival with new generation drug eluting stents but no other percutaneous revascularisation technology compared with medical treatment.

Treatment of left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis: stent or surgery

BACKGROUND

Drug-eluting stents have emerged as a solution to the problem of restenosis after bare-metal stent implantation, as an alternative to off-pump coronary bypass, for isolated left anterior descending coronary artery lesions at short-term follow-up. However, long-term follow-up is yet to be defined.

METHODS

From January to December 2004, 64 consecutive patients underwent myocardial revascularization: 31 by drug-eluting stents and 33 by off-pump coronary bypass. The primary endpoint was angiographic outcome, and the secondary endpoint was clinical outcome at 5 years.

RESULTS

There was no early or late mortality in either group. Hospital stay was significantly shorter in the stent group (2.5 ± 2.1 vs. 7.1 ± 4.9 days, p = 0.003). Long-term patency was higher and major adverse cardiac events (recurrence of angina and revascularization of target vessel) were encountered less frequently in the coronary bypass group, although not significantly.

CONCLUSION

The 5-year follow-up showed no significant difference between the off-pump coronary bypass and stent groups for the primary and secondary endpoints. As a significant difference between treatment options is lacking, decision-making for appropriate treatment in this group of patients requires the collaboration of cardiologists and cardiovascular surgeons and an individual approach, to achieve successful long-term outcomes.

Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass improves late survival compared with drug-eluting stents in isolated proximal left anterior descending artery disease: a 10-year follow-up, single-center, propensity score analysis

OBJECTIVES

Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) has been proposed to reduce surgical morbidity and improve long-term outcomes compared with stenting in the treatment of isolated proximal left anterior descending artery. However, the survival benefit from MIDCAB still needs to be demonstrated, in particular, because percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DES-PCI) continues to be considered the initial treatment strategy. We conducted a 10-year follow-up, single-center, propensity score-matched MIDCAB versus DES-PCI comparison.

METHODS

A total of 1033 patients (303 MIDCAB and 730 DES-PCI) with isolated proximal left anterior descending disease were included. Propensity score matching was used to compare 303 pairs of MIDCAB and DES-PCI patients.

RESULTS

MIDCAB and DES-PCI presented with comparable 30-day mortality (2 of 303 [0.6%] vs 1 of 303 [0.3%]; P=1.0). At 10 years, DES-PCI was associated with a 2.19-fold increased risk of late death (95% confidence interval, 1.15-4.17), a 2.0-fold increased risk of repeat revascularization (95% confidence interval, 1.20-3.47), and a 2.14-fold increased risk of the composite of death and repeat revascularization (95% confidence interval, 1.41-3.24).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings strongly support a survival benefit from MIDCAB at long-term follow-up compared with DES-PCI in the treatment of isolated left anterior descending disease.

Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass in the era of percutaneous coronary intervention

AIM

Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) allows revascularization of the left anterior descending coronary (LAD) artery through a less traumatic surgical approach. However, the procedure is technically challenging and concern still exists, mainly based on graft patency. The purpose of this study is to critically evaluate short and long-term benefits of this surgical treatment.

METHODS

Between June 1997 and July 2012, 306 patients underwent MIDCAB on LAD. The mean age was 62 ± 10 years (range, 32-87 years) and 264 patients (86.3%) were men. Mean ejection fraction was 54%. Eighty-nine procedures (29.1%) were performed using a hybrid approach by means of MIDCAB and postoperative (60 patients, 67.4%) or preoperative (29 patients, 32.6%) percutaneous interventions on non-LAD vessels. A EuroScore more than 6 was found in 43 (14%) patients. The average follow-up time was 9.5 ± 3.2 years and was 89% complete.

RESULTS

Six patients (1.9%) required intraoperative conversion to sternotomy, whereas cardiopulmonary bypass institution after the sternotomy was necessary in one. Postoperative acute myocardial infarction occurring nine patients (2.9%), low output syndrome in four (1.3%). Postoperative mortality was 1.6% (n = 5), and perioperative stroke rate 0.6% (n = 2). Five and 10-year survival were 94.1 and 86.9%, respectively. Freedom from death due to cardiac events and major cardiac and cerebral events at 10 years was, respectively, 97.1 and 92.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

The results confirm the favorable short and long-term results of the MIDCAB procedure. MIDCAB, in experienced centers, can represent an alternative treatment option for LAD disease.

Surgical pitfalls of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass procedure from the viewpoint of a surgeon in the learning curve

Introduction

Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCAB) offers arterial revascularization of the left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery especially in lesions unsuitable for percutaneous coronary interventions. By avoidance of sternotomy and cardiopulmonary bypass its invasiveness is less than that of conventional bypass surgery.

Aim

We in this study discuss our surgical experience in the MIDCAB procedure.

Material and methods

Thirteen patients were operated on with the MIDCAB procedure. The inclusion criteria for MIDCAB were pure LAD disease totally occluded or severely stenotic. Patient demographics and preoperative and postoperative data were analyzed.

Results

Mean age of the patients was 60.0 ±8.6 years. Patients’ preoperative and postoperative levels of cardiac CK-MB (creatine kinase MB) were not significantly different (p = 0.993). However, cardiac troponin I (p < 0.001), hemoglobin (p < 0.001) and hematocrit (p < 0.001) were significantly different. No perioperative myocardial infarctions or cerebrovascular accidents were seen. The patients were discharged at a mean day of 4.77 with oral antiaggregant therapy. No mortality was seen in the study population.

Conclusions

Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass is associated with few perioperative complications. Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass in our experience is a very good option for single vessel LAD disease.

Elective minimally invasive coronary artery bypass: shunt or tournique occlusion? Assessment of a protective role of perioperative left anterior descending shunting on myocardial damage. A prospective randomized study

Background

To determine impact of intraluminal-left anterior descending shunt to prevent myocardial damage in minimally invasive coronary artery bypass.

Methods

38 patients were randomly assigned to external tournique occlusion (n = 19) or intraluminal-left anterior descending shunt group (n = 19). Blood samples for cardiac troponin T were collected at 30 minutes prior to, 6 and 24 hours after surgery.

Results

One patient in external tournique occlusion and two patients in intraluminal-left anterior descending shunt group were excluded from futher analysis due to preoperative cardiac troponin T level above the 99th-percentile. Postoperatively, each six patients in external tournique occlusion (33.3%) and intraluminal-left anterior descending shunt (35.3%) group were above the 99th-percentile. Two patients from each group (external tournique occlusion group 11.1% vs. intraluminal-left anterior descending shunt group 11.8%) had peak values above 10-% coeficient of variation cutoff (p = 1). There were no significant differences in between both groups at all studied timepoints.

Conclusion

There was no protective effect of intraluminal shunting on myocardial damage compared to short-term tournique occlusion. It is upon the surgeon's discretion which method may preferrably be used to achieve a bloodless field in grafting of the non-occluded left anterior descending in minimally invasive coronary artery bypass.

Hybrid coronary revascularization: a review

The long-term benefits of a left internal mammary artery bypass graft compared to the left anterior descending artery have been well described. The use of drug-eluting stents has minimized the morbidity of revascularization. Hybrid coronary revascularization is the planned use of minimally invasive surgical techniques for left internal mammary artery-left anterior descending artery grafting and the use of percutaneous coronary intervention for nonleft anterior descending coronary artery target revascularization. The optimal timing and order of revascularization in hybrid coronary revascularization remains unclear.

Long-Term Survival after Minimal Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass (MIDCAB) Surgery in Patients with Low Ejection Fraction

Objective

The long-term survival after minimal invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery to any coronary territory in patients with ejection fraction of ≤30% was investigated for the first time in literature.

Methods

Seventy-three patients with primary MIDCAB and 89 patients with reoperative MIDCAB were studied including preoperative risk factors, operative details, early postoperative complications, and survival up to 10 years postoperatively.

Results

Despite the high-risk profile of the patients, the MIDCAB approach for targeted revascularization resulted in excellent short-term results. Ventricular arrhythmia contributed to four of six early deaths. Survival at 5 years postoperatively was 62.5% for primary MIDCAB and 43.2% for reoperative MIDCAB and at 10 years was 36.9% and 29.5%, respectively. Functionally complete vascularization correlates with significantly better long-term survival particularly in primary MIDCAB procedures.

Conclusions

MIDCAB is a valuable option for targeted revascularization in high-risk patients with low ejection fraction and reoperation.

Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass as a Primary Strategy for Reoperative Myocardial Revascularization

Objective

Conventional reoperative coronary artery bypass grafting is associated with risk of sternal re-entry, injury to patent grafts, and embolization from diseased grafts. Sternal sparing minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) avoids such risks in cases where it is technically feasible. We sought to examine in-hospital outcomes of reoperative MIDCAB surgery.

Methods

We recorded prospective standardized data from the New York Cardiac Surgical Reporting System database of 369 reoperative MIDCAB cases from 1996 to 2006 and compared with 822 primary MIDCAB patients in the same time period. We compared the preoperative risk profile and postoperative in-hospital outcomes and length of stay for both groups.

Results

There was a significantly higher risk profile typical of the reoperative patient population (P < 0.001 for stroke, peripheral/cerebrovascular disease, extensive aortic calcification, renal failure, and left ventricular ejection fraction <40%) compared with the primary MIDCAB group. Despite this fact, there was no difference in the in-hospital outcomes and length of hospital stay between the two groups.

Conclusions

Reoperative MIDCAB provides targeted coronary revascularization and avoids hazards of sternal re-entry, graft injury and manipulation, and deleterious effects of cardiopulmonary bypass. This hastens recovery and provides excellent early outcomes equivalent to primary MIDCAB procedures.