Campos CM, Christiansen EH, Stone GW, Serruys PW. The EXCEL and NOBLE trials: similarities, contrasts and future perspectives for left main revascularisation.
EUROINTERVENTION 2016;
11 Suppl V:V115-9. [PMID:
25983143 DOI:
10.4244/eijv11sva26]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
Unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis has relatively high prevalence and exposes patients to a high risk for adverse cardiovascular events. The optimal revascularisation strategy (coronary artery bypass surgery [CABG] or percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]) for patients with complex coronary artery disease is a topic of continuing debate. The introduction of the newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) -with documented improvements in both safety and efficacy- has prompted the interventional community to design two new dedicated randomised trials comparing CABG and PCI: the NOBLE (Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Vs Drug Eluting Stent Percutaneous Coronary Angioplasty in the Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Stenosis) and EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Everolimus Eluting Stent Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trials. The aims of the present review are to describe the similarities and contrasts between these two trials as well to explore their future implications in ULMCA treatment.
Collapse