Premium
Cardiac surgery versus stenting: what is better for the patient?
Author(s) -
Edelman J. James B.,
Wilson Michael K.,
Ban Paul G.,
Vallely Michael P.
Publication year - 2012
Publication title -
anz journal of surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.426
H-Index - 70
eISSN - 1445-2197
pISSN - 1445-1433
DOI - 10.1111/j.1445-2197.2012.06262.x
Subject(s) - medicine , conventional pci , percutaneous coronary intervention , cardiology , coronary artery disease , revascularization , bypass grafting , artery , left main coronary artery disease , cardiac surgery , myocardial infarction
Abstract Patterns of myocardial revascularization have changed significantly over the past decade. There has been a relative decrease of coronary artery bypass grafting ( CABG ) compared with percutaneous coronary intervention ( PCI ) and some patients are undergoing PCI for coronary lesions traditionally reserved for CABG . The mid‐ to long‐term results of several trials comparing PCI with CABG have recently been published. For three‐vessel disease, CABG is superior to PCI , with lower rates of major adverse cardiac events. PCI may be equivalent to CABG for three‐vessel disease in the lowest disease complexity tercile ( SYNTAX score <22; ∼20% of patients). This review focuses on the most recent evidence for myocardial revascularization in patients with multi‐vessel and left main coronary artery disease.