Revascularization in stable coronary artery disease: a combined perspective from an interventional cardiologist and a cardiac surgeon.

It is now half a century since the start of coronary bypass graft surgery (CABG) with the first percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) following just over a decade later. The relative merits of PCI vs. CABG for stable coronary artery disease (stable-CAD) have continued to be debated ever since and have been the focus of around 20 randomized trials and numerous registry studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. The aim of this review is to identify areas of agreement, disagreement, and uncertainties in the role of PCI and CABG in patients with stable-CAD.

[1]  Marie Schmidt,et al.  HEAL TH AT A GLANCE , 2007 .

[2]  Volker Klauss,et al.  Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guidance of PCI in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (FAME): 5-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial , 2015, The Lancet.

[3]  M. Jeong,et al.  Randomized Trial of Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: 5-Year Outcomes of the PRECOMBAT Study. , 2015, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[4]  D. Altman,et al.  Major geographical variations in elective coronary revascularization by stents or surgery in England. , 2015, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[5]  Shaoyi Zheng,et al.  Hybrid coronary revascularization versus coronary artery bypass grafting for multivessel coronary artery disease: systematic review and meta-analysis , 2015, Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery.

[6]  E. Steyerberg,et al.  Optimal Medical Therapy Improves Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Revascularization With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Insights From the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) Trial at the 5-Year Fol , 2015, Circulation.

[7]  E. Hannan,et al.  Everolimus-eluting stents or bypass surgery for multivessel coronary disease. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[8]  A. Yeung,et al.  Trial of everolimus-eluting stents or bypass surgery for coronary disease. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[9]  T. Sundt,et al.  Surgical Ineligibility and Mortality Among Patients With Unprotected Left Main or Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , 2014, Circulation.

[10]  M. Zembala,et al.  Hybrid revascularization for multivessel coronary artery disease. , 2014, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[11]  M. Mack,et al.  Coronary artery bypass grafting vs. percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with three-vessel disease: final five-year follow-up of the SYNTAX trial. , 2014, European heart journal.

[12]  P. Kolh,et al.  [2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization]. , 2014, Kardiologia polska.

[13]  P. Serruys,et al.  Cost-Effectiveness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Patients With 3-Vessel or Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Final Results From the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) Trial , 2014, Circulation.

[14]  Nikola Jagic,et al.  Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI for stable coronary artery disease. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[15]  J. Spertus,et al.  Variation in patients’ perceptions of elective percutaneous coronary intervention in stable coronary artery disease: cross sectional study , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[16]  D. Altman,et al.  Effect of Bilateral Internal Mammary Artery Grafts on Long-Term Survival: A Meta-Analysis Approach , 2014, Circulation.

[17]  P. Kolh,et al.  Revascularisation versus medical treatment in patients with stable coronary artery disease: network meta-analysis , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[18]  M. Mack,et al.  Five-Year Outcomes in Patients With Left Main Disease Treated With Either Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery Trial , 2014, Circulation.

[19]  M. Akay,et al.  Coronary artery bypass grafting vs percutaneous coronary intervention and long-term mortality and morbidity in multivessel disease: meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of the arterial grafting and stenting era. , 2014, JAMA internal medicine.

[20]  Samin K. Sharma,et al.  Appropriateness of Diagnostic Catheterization for Suspected Coronary Artery Disease in New York State , 2014, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.

[21]  E. Tuzcu,et al.  Late Stroke: Comparison of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Multivessel Disease and Unprotected Left Main Disease A Meta-Analysis and Review of Literature , 2014, Stroke.

[22]  V. Fuster,et al.  Comparison of coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. , 2013, The lancet. Diabetes & endocrinology.

[23]  S. Ellis,et al.  Left main coronary artery stenosis: a meta-analysis of drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting. , 2013, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[24]  V. Fuster,et al.  Quality of life after PCI vs CABG among patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease: a randomized clinical trial. , 2013, JAMA.

[25]  V. Falk,et al.  Coronary artery bypass grafting: Part 1--the evolution over the first 50 years. , 2013, European heart journal.

[26]  M. Hlatky,et al.  Comparative Effectiveness of Multivessel Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery and Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , 2013, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[27]  A. Raval,et al.  Patient preferences for coronary artery bypass graft surgery or percutaneous intervention in multivessel coronary artery disease , 2013, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[28]  B. Uretsky,et al.  Effectiveness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Drug‐Eluting Stents Compared With Bypass Surgery in Diabetics With Multivessel Coronary Disease: Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis of Randomized Clinical Data , 2013, Journal of the American Heart Association.

[29]  M. Mack,et al.  Quantification of Incomplete Revascularization and its Association With Five-Year Mortality in the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) Trial Validation of the Residual SYNTAX Score , 2013, Circulation.

[30]  A. Diegeler,et al.  Off-pump versus on-pump coronary-artery bypass grafting in elderly patients. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[31]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Effects of off-pump and on-pump coronary-artery bypass grafting at 1 year. , 2013, The New England journal of medicine.

[32]  Antonio Colombo,et al.  Anatomical and clinical characteristics to guide decision making between coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention for individual patients: development and validation of SYNTAX score II , 2013, The Lancet.

[33]  Lynn A. Sleeper,et al.  Cost-Effectiveness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Drug Eluting Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Results From the FREEDOM Trial , 2013, Circulation.

[34]  M. Shishehbor,et al.  Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes , 2013 .

[35]  Akshay S. Desai,et al.  Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[36]  Sean M. O'Brien,et al.  Comparative effectiveness of revascularization strategies. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[37]  J. Tu,et al.  Determinants of variations in coronary revascularization practices , 2012, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[38]  Helmut Baumgartner,et al.  ESC / EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization , 2014 .

[39]  V. Chair,et al.  ACCF/AHA Practice Guideline 2011 ACCF/AHA Guideline for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: Executive Summary A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines , 2011 .

[40]  M. Misfeld,et al.  Neurologic complications after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting with and without aortic manipulation: meta-analysis of 11,398 cases from 8 studies. , 2011, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[41]  D. Taggart,et al.  Informed consent for interventions in stable coronary artery disease: problems, etiologies, and solutions. , 2011, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[42]  R. Hachamovitch,et al.  Incremental Prognostic Significance of Combined Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Adenosine Stress Perfusion, Delayed Enhancement, and Left Ventricular Function Over Preimaging Information for the Prediction of Adverse Events , 2011, Circulation.

[43]  Jeffrey Gold,et al.  Adherence of Catheterization Laboratory Cardiologists to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Interventions and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: What Happens in Actual Practice? , 2010, Circulation.

[44]  M. Mack,et al.  Assessment of the SYNTAX score in the Syntax study. , 2009, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[45]  D. Taggart.  Thomas B. Ferguson Lecture. Coronary artery bypass grafting is still the best treatment for multivessel and left main disease, but patients need to know. , 2006, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[46]  K. Filion,et al.  Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With First-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents , 2022 .