We have located links that may give you full text access.
ENGLISH ABSTRACT
JOURNAL ARTICLE
[Percutaneous coronary intervention of unprotected left main coronary compared with coronary artery bypass grafting; 3 years of experience in the National Institute of Cardiology, Mexico].
Archivos de Cardiología de México 2018 April
BACKGROUND: The best revascularisation method of the unprotected left main artery is a current and evolving topic.
METHODS: A total of 2439 percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) were registered during a 3-year period. The study included all the patients with PCI of the unprotected left main coronary (n=48) and matched with patients who underwent coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) (n=50). Major adverse cerebral and cardiac events (MACCE) were assessed within the hospital and in outpatients during a 16 month follow up.
RESULTS: The cardiovascular risk was greater in the PCI group; logEuroSCORE 16±21 vs. 5±6, P=.001; clinical Syntax 77±74 vs 53±39, P=.04. On admission, the PCI group of patients had a higher frequency of ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and cardiogenic shock. The MACCE were similar in both groups (14% vs. 18%, P=.64). STEMI was less frequent in the PCI group (0% vs. 10%, P=.03). Cardiovascular events were lower in the PCI group (2.3% vs. 18%, P=.01), and there was a decrease in general and cardiac mortality (2.3% vs. 12%, P=.08 y 2.3% vs. 8%, P=.24), on excluding the patients with cardiogenic shock as a presentation. MACCE were similar in both groups in the out-patient phase (15% vs. 12%, P=.46). Survival without MACCE, general and cardiac death were comparable between groups (log rank, P=.38, P=.44 and P=.16, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Even though the clinical and peri-procedural risk profile of the PCI patients were higher, the in-hospital and out-hospital efficacy and safety were comparable with CABG.
METHODS: A total of 2439 percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) were registered during a 3-year period. The study included all the patients with PCI of the unprotected left main coronary (n=48) and matched with patients who underwent coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) (n=50). Major adverse cerebral and cardiac events (MACCE) were assessed within the hospital and in outpatients during a 16 month follow up.
RESULTS: The cardiovascular risk was greater in the PCI group; logEuroSCORE 16±21 vs. 5±6, P=.001; clinical Syntax 77±74 vs 53±39, P=.04. On admission, the PCI group of patients had a higher frequency of ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and cardiogenic shock. The MACCE were similar in both groups (14% vs. 18%, P=.64). STEMI was less frequent in the PCI group (0% vs. 10%, P=.03). Cardiovascular events were lower in the PCI group (2.3% vs. 18%, P=.01), and there was a decrease in general and cardiac mortality (2.3% vs. 12%, P=.08 y 2.3% vs. 8%, P=.24), on excluding the patients with cardiogenic shock as a presentation. MACCE were similar in both groups in the out-patient phase (15% vs. 12%, P=.46). Survival without MACCE, general and cardiac death were comparable between groups (log rank, P=.38, P=.44 and P=.16, respectively).
CONCLUSION: Even though the clinical and peri-procedural risk profile of the PCI patients were higher, the in-hospital and out-hospital efficacy and safety were comparable with CABG.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app