Choice of revascularization strategy for ischemic cardiomyopathy due to multivessel coronary disease

IF 4.9 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jtcvs.2024.03.007
Anas H. Alzahrani MD, MPH , Shinobu Itagaki MD, MSc , Natalia N. Egorova PhD, MPH , Joanna Chikwe MD
{"title":"Choice of revascularization strategy for ischemic cardiomyopathy due to multivessel coronary disease","authors":"Anas H. Alzahrani MD, MPH ,&nbsp;Shinobu Itagaki MD, MSc ,&nbsp;Natalia N. Egorova PhD, MPH ,&nbsp;Joanna Chikwe MD","doi":"10.1016/j.jtcvs.2024.03.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>Limited comparative data guide the decision between coronary artery bypass grafting<span><span> and percutaneous coronary intervention for multivessel revascularization in </span>ischemic cardiomyopathy<span>. The study objective was to compare the long-term outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention for ischemic cardiomyopathy.</span></span></div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Clinical registries from the New Jersey Department of Health linked to administrative databases were used to compare all-cause mortality, repeat revascularization, heart failure readmissions, myocardial infarction, and stroke using Cox proportional hazards and propensity matching with competing risk analysis in 5988 patients with ejection fraction<span> 35% or less who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (3673, 61.3%) or percutaneous coronary intervention (2315, 38.6%) for multivessel coronary disease between 2007 and 2018. Median follow-up time was 5.2 years (range, 0-13 years); the last follow-up date was December 31, 2020.</span></div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>After controlling for completeness of revascularization, at 13 years, mortality was 57% (95% CI, 51-63) after percutaneous coronary intervention and 60% (95% CI, 53-66) after coronary artery bypass grafting (hazard ratio [HR], 1.10; 95% CI, 0.93-1.31; <em>P</em> = .28); risk of repeat revascularization was 18% for percutaneous coronary intervention versus 14% for coronary artery bypass grafting (HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.17-2.25; <em>P</em> = .003); risk of readmission for heart failure was 16% after percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting (HR, 1.13,95% CI, 0.84-1.51, weighted <em>P</em> = .10); risk of myocardial infarction was 10% versus 6%, respectively (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.18-3.09; <em>P</em> = .007); and stroke risk was 3% versus 4%, respectively (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.41-1.53; <em>P</em> = .52). Rate of complete revascularization was lower after percutaneous coronary intervention than after coronary artery bypass grafting and associated with higher mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.20-1.52; <em>P</em> &lt; .001).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Coronary bypass was associated with similar mortality, stroke, and heart failure readmissions, and reduced repeat revascularization compared with percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy if similar rates of complete revascularization were achieved. These findings support consensus recommendations for coronary artery bypass grafting and medical therapy in patients with multivessel coronary disease<span> and left ventricular dysfunction.</span></div></div>","PeriodicalId":49975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","volume":"169 2","pages":"Pages 639-647.e21"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022522324002083","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Limited comparative data guide the decision between coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention for multivessel revascularization in ischemic cardiomyopathy. The study objective was to compare the long-term outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention for ischemic cardiomyopathy.

Methods

Clinical registries from the New Jersey Department of Health linked to administrative databases were used to compare all-cause mortality, repeat revascularization, heart failure readmissions, myocardial infarction, and stroke using Cox proportional hazards and propensity matching with competing risk analysis in 5988 patients with ejection fraction 35% or less who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (3673, 61.3%) or percutaneous coronary intervention (2315, 38.6%) for multivessel coronary disease between 2007 and 2018. Median follow-up time was 5.2 years (range, 0-13 years); the last follow-up date was December 31, 2020.

Results

After controlling for completeness of revascularization, at 13 years, mortality was 57% (95% CI, 51-63) after percutaneous coronary intervention and 60% (95% CI, 53-66) after coronary artery bypass grafting (hazard ratio [HR], 1.10; 95% CI, 0.93-1.31; P = .28); risk of repeat revascularization was 18% for percutaneous coronary intervention versus 14% for coronary artery bypass grafting (HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.17-2.25; P = .003); risk of readmission for heart failure was 16% after percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting (HR, 1.13,95% CI, 0.84-1.51, weighted P = .10); risk of myocardial infarction was 10% versus 6%, respectively (HR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.18-3.09; P = .007); and stroke risk was 3% versus 4%, respectively (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.41-1.53; P = .52). Rate of complete revascularization was lower after percutaneous coronary intervention than after coronary artery bypass grafting and associated with higher mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.20-1.52; P < .001).

Conclusions

Coronary bypass was associated with similar mortality, stroke, and heart failure readmissions, and reduced repeat revascularization compared with percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy if similar rates of complete revascularization were achieved. These findings support consensus recommendations for coronary artery bypass grafting and medical therapy in patients with multivessel coronary disease and left ventricular dysfunction.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
多血管冠状动脉疾病导致的缺血性心肌病的血管重建策略选择。
背景:在缺血性心肌病的多血管血运重建治疗中,冠状动脉搭桥手术(CABG)与经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的比较数据有限:比较 CABG 和 PCI 治疗缺血性心肌病的长期疗效:采用Cox比例危险分析和倾向匹配与竞争风险分析方法,对2007-2018年间因多支血管冠状动脉疾病接受CABG(3673例,61.3%)或PCI(2315例,38.6%)治疗的射血分数≤35%的5988例患者的全因死亡率、重复血管再通、心衰(HF)再入院、心肌梗死(MI)和卒中进行比较。中位随访时间为5.2年(范围:0-13年);最后一次随访日期为2020年12月31日:在控制血管再通的完整性后,13年后,PCI术后死亡率为57%(95% CI,51%-63%),CABG术后死亡率为60%(95% CI,53%-66%)(危险比(HR)1.10;95%置信区间(CI)0.93-1.31;P=0.28);PCI术后重复血管再通的风险为18%,CABG术后为14%(HR=1.62;95%CI,1.17-2.25;P=0.003);PCI和CABG术后HF再入院风险分别为16%(HR=1.13,95%CI,0.84-1.51,加权P=0.10);MI为10%对6%,(HR=1.91;95%CI,1.18-3.09;P=0.007);卒中风险分别为3%对4%(HR=0.79;95%CI,0.41-1.53;P=0.52)。PCI术后完全血管再通率低于CABG术,但PCI术后死亡率更高(HR=1.35;95% CI 1.20-1.52;P=0.52):与 PCI 相比,冠状动脉搭桥术与缺血性心肌病患者的死亡率、卒中和高频再入院率相似,如果达到相似的完全血运重建率,则可减少重复血运重建。这些研究结果支持对多支血管冠状动脉疾病和左心室功能障碍患者进行冠状动脉搭桥术和药物治疗的共识建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
11.20
自引率
10.00%
发文量
1079
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery presents original, peer-reviewed articles on diseases of the heart, great vessels, lungs and thorax with emphasis on surgical interventions. An official publication of The American Association for Thoracic Surgery and The Western Thoracic Surgical Association, the Journal focuses on techniques and developments in acquired cardiac surgery, congenital cardiac repair, thoracic procedures, heart and lung transplantation, mechanical circulatory support and other procedures.
期刊最新文献
Commentator Discussion: A randomized study of cryoablation of intercostal nerves in patients undergoing minimally invasive thoracic surgery. Reply: Textbook outcome and survival in esophageal surgery: A comparative perspective on robotic and laparoscopic approaches. Commentator Discussion: Effects of mitral calcification in severe aortic stenosis with severe mitral regurgitation on left heart remodeling, surgical strategy, and outcomes. Unplanned postoperative catheterization after coronary artery bypass graft: Improving quality of care. SEGMENTECTOMY/WEDGE resection following neoadjuvant/induction immunochemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer: Is it justified?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1