Article

Comparison of Bare-Metal Stenting With Minimally Invasive Bypass Surgery for Stenosis of the Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery A 5-Year Follow-Up

University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Saxony, Germany
Circulation (Impact Factor: 14.43). 11/2005; 112(22):3445-50. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.578492
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

Randomized trials comparing stenting with minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with isolated proximal left anterior descending lesions have shown a significantly higher reintervention rate for stenting and similar results for mortality and reinfarction at short-term follow-up. Long-term follow-up data are sparse.
Patients with isolated proximal left anterior descending stenosis were randomized to either surgery (n=110) or bare-metal stenting (n=110). At 5 years, follow-up data were obtained with respect to the primary end point of death, reinfarction, or repeated target vessel revascularization. Clinical symptoms were assessed by the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) classification. Follow-up information was completed for 216 patients (98.2%), and mean follow-up was 5.6+/-1.2 years. With respect to mortality (surgery, 12%; stenting, 10%; P=0.54) and reinfarctions (surgery, 7%; stenting, 5%; P=0.46), there were no differences between treatment strategies. The need for repeated target vessel revascularization was significantly higher after stenting (32%) compared with surgery (10%; P<0.001). Clinical symptoms improved significantly in both treatment groups compared with baseline; however, there was a favorable trend for surgery (stenting: CCS, 2.6+/-0.9 to 0.5+/-0.8, P<0.001; surgery: CCS, 2.6+/-0.9 to 0.3+/-0.6, P<0.001; P=0.05, stenting versus surgery).
At the 5-year follow-up, minimally invasive bypass surgery and bare-metal stenting showed similar results for the end points of mortality and reinfarctions. However, the reintervention rate is higher after stenting, and the relief in clinical symptoms is slightly better after surgery.

Full-text preview

Available from: circ.ahajournals.org
  • Source
    • "Diegeler et al. first published complete results of an RCT in 2002 reporting a 6-month follow-up [23]. A five-year follow-up was reported from Thiele et al. [24], and Blazek et al. reported a 10-year follow-up in 2013 [13]. Included in this meta-analysis is the publication from Blazek complemented with all available previously published data. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) grafting are both established therapeutic options for single-vessel disease of the left anterior descending artery (LAD). The present systematic review with meta-analysis aims to determine the current strength of evidence for or against PCI and MIDCAB for revascularization of the LAD. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) and observational trials (OTs) that reported clinical outcome after isolated LAD revascularization. Analysed postoperative outcomes included major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction and stroke. Pooled treatment effects [odds ratio (OR) or weighted mean difference (WMD), 95% confidence intervals (95% CI)] were assessed using a fixed- or random-effects model. A total of 2885 patients from 12 studies (6 RCTs, 6 OTs) were identified after a literature search of major databases using a predefined list of keywords. PCI of the LAD was performed in 60.7% (n = 1751) and MIDCAB in 39.3% of patients (n = 1126). Pooled-effect estimates revealed an increased incidence for MACCEs after PCI (OR 1.98; 95% CI 1.45-2.69; P < 0.0001) 6 months after the procedure. Especially, PCI was particularly associated with an increased odds for target vessel revascularization (OR 2.11; 95% CI 1.00-4.47; P = 0.0295). No differences with regard to stroke, myocardial infarction and all-cause mortality were observed between both revascularization strategies. Patients after PCI had a shorter length of hospital stay (WMD -3.37 days; 95% CI (-)4.92 to (-)1.81; P < 0.0001). In conclusion, the present systematic review underscores the superiority of MIDCAB over PCI for treatment of single-vessel disease of the LAD.
    Full-text · Article · Aug 2014 · European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery: official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery
  • Source
    • "However, owing to the need for repeat revascularization with PCI (BMS), MIDCAB is likely to be a more cost-effective medium. Thiele's group [13] conducted a 5-year follow-up study of 220 patients with isolated LAD stenosis randomized to MIDCAB or PCI (BMS). Mortality was similar in both groups, as was reinfarction rate. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was, 'What is the optimal revascularization technique for isolated disease of the left anterior descending artery (LAD) in terms of patient survival, morbidity such as myocardial infarction (MI) and need for repeat target vessel revascularization: minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass graft (MIDCAB) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)?' Altogether 504 papers were found using the reported search, of which 13 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. Outcome parameters that were used in the assessment include the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular or cerebral events (MACCEs), mortality and the rate of repeat target vessel revascularization. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes, results and study weaknesses of the papers are tabulated. One meta-analysis showed no significant difference in terms of individual incidences of MI, stroke or mortality, but when considered as a composite MACCE outcome, this was found to be significantly lower in the MIDCAB group. Moreover, further meta-analytical data have revealed a 5-fold increase in the need for repeat revascularization with PCI, with some centres reporting rates of up to 34%. However, retrospective data have shown that average length of hospital stay was longer in the MIDCAB group (7.4 ± 3.2 vs 3.4 ± 3.5 days; P < 0.001). We conclude that there are obvious proven benefits with MIDCAB, namely in terms of a reduced need for repeat target vessel revascularization and incidence of MACCE, and one study has even shown that there is a long-term survival benefit in 'real-world' clinical practice. However, given that there is a lack of well-powered randomized controlled trial and long-term follow-up data to prove a mortality benefit in support of MIDCAB, patients requiring revascularization of isolated proximal LAD stenosis and being considered for percutaneous coronary intervention should be discussed in a multidisciplinary team setting prior to intervention.
    Preview · Article · Mar 2014 · Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery
  • Source
    • "The MIDCAB operation is more costly than bare metal stenting and more challenging than conventional CABG [14]. On the other hand, a high reintervention rate during the first 6 months equals the initial cost savings of the procedure [15]. For countries like ours which import the stents and which have cheap human resources, MIDCAB may even have equal or lower costs than the stenting procedures. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: 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. We in this study discuss our surgical experience in the MIDCAB procedure. 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. 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. 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.
    Full-text · Article · Mar 2013 · Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques / Wideochirurgia i Inne Techniki Malo Inwazyjne
Show more