Impact of on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting on 10-year mortality versus percutaneous coronary intervention

Coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention in single-vessel left anterior descending artery disease: mid-term propensity matching study

Introduction

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been considered to be the proven therapeutic choice for coronary artery disease. However, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents is increasingly used for extensive coronary artery disease with contradictory results. The aim of this study is to compare immediate- and mid-term results of CABG where skeletonized internal mammary artery (IMA) was used as in situ graft versus PCI with serolimus drug eluted stents (SES) in single-vessel left anterior descending artery (LAD) disease.

Methods

In 2014-2022, 938 patients treated for isolated LAD revascularization were included in this study. Among them, there were 346 patients with CABG-IMA and 592 patients with SES-PCI. CABG-IMA patients (n = 266) were compared with SES-PCI patients (n = 266) in propensity score-matched method.Primary outcome measures were identified as all-cause mortality at 30 days and 3 years after surgery, while secondary outcome measures were length of hospital stay and the incidence of postoperative major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE).

Results

Increased incidence for post procedural MACCE after PCI was recorded (CABG = 1.2% vs. PCI = 5.3%; p < 0.05). There was no difference in immediate-term (30 days: CABG = 1.2% vs. PCI = 1.5%; p = ns) and mid-term (3 years: CABG = 3.7% vs. PCI = 4.5%; p = ns) mortality between the groups. Patient after SES-PCI had shorter length of hospital stay (CABG = 7.7 days vs. PCI = 3.8 days; p < 0.05).

Conclusion

The results of the study indicated that CABG-IMA performed at the time of myocardial revascularization in single-vessel LAD disease is better than SES-PCI. Our conclusion is independent of traditionally accepted risk factors incorporated in the Logistic EuroSCORE II (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) and SYNTAX score II (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery Score II) and is exclusively method related.

Comparing clinical outcomes of hybrid coronary revascularization with open coronary artery bypass in patients with multi-vessels lesions

OBJECTIVES

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) involves the use of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) to treat the left anterior descending artery (LAD), and percutaneous coronary intervention to treat non-LAD vessels. We reported the results of a comparative analysis between HCR and off-pump CABG via sternotomy (OPCABG).

METHODS

Data were retrospectively collated from patients who underwent HCR or OPCABG for multivessel coronary artery disease between 2011 and 2022. Propensity score-based matching was performed to reduce the selection bias. The Comparisons of cardiac-related death, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), and repeat revascularization were performed by Kaplan-Meier analysis or the Fine-Gray test.

RESULTS

After matching, the baseline characteristics were well-balanced between the two groups with 91 patients per group. There was no significant difference in operative mortality rate (1.1% for HCR vs2.2% for OPCABG, p = 1.000). However, patients undergoing HCR required a significantly lower rate of blood product transfusions (p < .001) and experienced significantly fewer pulmonary complications than OPCABG patients (p < .001). At 10 years, the incidences of cardiac-related death, MACCE and repeat revascularization did not differ significantly between the two groups (9.5% vs11.5%, p = .277; 4.7% vs12.3%, p = .361; 1.2% vs2.5%, p = .914, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with multi-vessel lesions, HCR was comparable to OPCABG in long-term outcomes such as cardiac-related death, MACCE, and the durability of grafts. Additionally, HCR was better than OPCABG in perioperative outcomes. HCR may be an alternative therapy for OPCABG in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease.

Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: Evidence-Based Practice

Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery remains a pivotal cornerstone, offering established symptomatic alleviation and prognostic advantages for patients grappling with complex multivessel and left main coronary artery diseases. Despite the lucid guidance laid out by contemporary guidelines regarding the choice between CABG and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), a notable hesitation persists among certain patients, characterized by psychological reservations, knowledge gaps, or individual beliefs that sway their inclination toward surgical intervention. This comprehensive review critically synthesizes the prevailing guidelines, modern practices, and outcomes pertaining to CABG surgery, delving into an array of techniques and advancements poised to enhance both short-term and enduring surgical outcomes. The exploration encompasses advances in on-pump and off-pump procedures, conduit selection strategies encompassing the bilateral utilization of internal mammary artery and radial artery conduits, meticulous graft evaluation methodologies, and the panorama of minimally invasive approaches, including those assisted by robotic technology. Furthermore, the review navigates the terrain of hybrid coronary revascularization, shedding light on the pivotal roles of shared decision-making and the heart team in shaping treatment pathways. As a comprehensive compendium, this review not only navigates the intricate landscape of CABG surgery but also aligns it with contemporary practices, envisioning its trajectory within the evolving currents of healthcare dynamics.