Randomized Clinical Trial of Surgical vs. Percutaneous vs. Hybrid Revascularization in Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Residual Myocardial Ischemia and Clinical Outcomes at One Year—Hybrid coronary REvascularization Versus Stenting or Surgery (HREVS)

Autor: Vladimir Ganyukov, Nikita Kochergin, Aleksandr Shilov, Roman Tarasov, Jan Skupien, Wojciech Szot, Aleksandr Kokov, Vadim Popov, Kirill Kozyrin, Olga Barbarash, Leonid Barbarash, Piotr Musialek
Jazyk: angličtina
Rok vydání: 2020
Předmět:
Zdroj: Journal of Interventional Cardiology, Vol 2020 (2020)
Druh dokumentu: article
ISSN: 0896-4327
1540-8183
DOI: 10.1155/2020/5458064
Popis: Aim. Optimal revascularization strategy in multivessel (MV) coronary artery disease (CAD) eligible for percutaneous management (PCI) and surgery remains unresolved. We evaluated, in a randomized clinical trial, residual myocardial ischemia (RI) and clinical outcomes of MV-CAD revascularization using coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR), or MV-PCI. Methods. Consecutive MV-CAD patients (n = 155) were randomized (1 : 1 : 1) to conventional CABG (LIMA-LAD plus venous grafts) or HCR (MIDCAB LIMA-LAD followed by PCI for remaining vessels) or MV-PCI (everolimus-eluting CoCr stents) under Heart Team agreement on equal technical and clinical feasibility of each strategy. SPECT at 12 months (primary endpoint of RI that the trial was powered for; a measure of revascularization midterm efficacy and an independent predictor of long-term prognosis) preceded routine angiographic control. Results. Data are given, respectively, for the CABG, HCR, and MV-PCI arms. Incomplete revascularization rate was 8.0% vs. 7.7% vs. 5.7% (p=0.71). Hospital stay was 13.8 vs. 13.5 vs. 4.5 days (p
Databáze: Directory of Open Access Journals
Externí odkaz:
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje