Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with stenting in isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery: Six months' angiographic and clinical follow-up of a prospective randomized study

IF 4.4 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery Pub Date : 2002-07-01 DOI:10.1067/mtc.2002.122525
Derk J. Drenth MD, Jobst B. Winter MD, PhD, Nic J.G.M. Veeger MSc, Stefan H.J. Monnink MD, Ad J. van Boven MD, PhD, Jan G. Grandjean MD, PhD, Massimo A. Mariani MD, PhD, Piet W. Boonstra MD, PhD
{"title":"Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with stenting in isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery: Six months' angiographic and clinical follow-up of a prospective randomized study","authors":"Derk J. Drenth MD,&nbsp;Jobst B. Winter MD, PhD,&nbsp;Nic J.G.M. Veeger MSc,&nbsp;Stefan H.J. Monnink MD,&nbsp;Ad J. van Boven MD, PhD,&nbsp;Jan G. Grandjean MD, PhD,&nbsp;Massimo A. Mariani MD, PhD,&nbsp;Piet W. Boonstra MD, PhD","doi":"10.1067/mtc.2002.122525","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><strong>Objective:</strong> We sought to compare minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (surgical intervention) with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with primary stenting (stenting) in patients having an isolated high-grade stenosis (American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association classification type B2 or C) of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery. At 6 months, both procedures were compared on the basis of quantitative angiography and clinical outcome. <strong>Methods:</strong> Both treatments were compared in a single-center, prospective, randomized study. The primary end point of this study was quantitative angiographic outcome at 6 months. The secondary end point was 6-month clinical outcome. Statistical analysis was performed in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle. <strong>Results:</strong> From March 1997 to September 1999, patients with angina pectoris caused by an isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery were randomly assigned to surgical intervention (n = 51) or stenting (n = 51). At 6 months, quantitative coronary angiography showed an anastomotic stenosis rate of 4% after surgical intervention and a restenosis rate of 29% after stenting (<em>P</em> &lt;.001). Periprocedural events did not significantly differ between surgical intervention and stenting. After surgical intervention, 2 patients died; no patients died after stenting. After 6 months, no significant difference was found for major adverse cardiac or cerebral events and need for repeat target vessel revascularization. After 6 months, return of angina pectoris, physical work capacity, and use of antianginal drugs did not significantly differ between treatments. <strong>Conclusions:</strong> After 6 months, surgical intervention had a significantly better angiographic outcome than stenting in patients with an isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery. Clinical outcome did not significantly differ between treatments.</p><p>J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002;124:130-5</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49975,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","volume":"124 1","pages":"Pages 130-135"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2002-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1067/mtc.2002.122525","citationCount":"58","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022522302000491","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: 58

Abstract

Objective: We sought to compare minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (surgical intervention) with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with primary stenting (stenting) in patients having an isolated high-grade stenosis (American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association classification type B2 or C) of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery. At 6 months, both procedures were compared on the basis of quantitative angiography and clinical outcome. Methods: Both treatments were compared in a single-center, prospective, randomized study. The primary end point of this study was quantitative angiographic outcome at 6 months. The secondary end point was 6-month clinical outcome. Statistical analysis was performed in accordance with the intention-to-treat principle. Results: From March 1997 to September 1999, patients with angina pectoris caused by an isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery were randomly assigned to surgical intervention (n = 51) or stenting (n = 51). At 6 months, quantitative coronary angiography showed an anastomotic stenosis rate of 4% after surgical intervention and a restenosis rate of 29% after stenting (P <.001). Periprocedural events did not significantly differ between surgical intervention and stenting. After surgical intervention, 2 patients died; no patients died after stenting. After 6 months, no significant difference was found for major adverse cardiac or cerebral events and need for repeat target vessel revascularization. After 6 months, return of angina pectoris, physical work capacity, and use of antianginal drugs did not significantly differ between treatments. Conclusions: After 6 months, surgical intervention had a significantly better angiographic outcome than stenting in patients with an isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery. Clinical outcome did not significantly differ between treatments.

J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002;124:130-5

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
微创冠状动脉旁路移植术与经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术联合支架置入治疗孤立的左前降支近端高度狭窄:一项前瞻性随机研究的6个月血管造影和临床随访
目的:我们试图比较微创冠状动脉旁路移植术(手术干预)与经皮腔内冠状动脉成形术合并初级支架植入术(支架植入术)对孤立的左前降支近端高度狭窄(美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会分类B2或C型)的患者的影响。在6个月时,根据定量血管造影和临床结果对两种方法进行比较。方法:在一项单中心、前瞻性、随机研究中比较两种治疗方法。本研究的主要终点是6个月时的定量血管造影结果。次要终点为6个月的临床结果。按照意向治疗原则进行统计分析。结果:1997年3月至1999年9月,51例因孤立性冠状动脉左前降支近端高度狭窄引起的心绞痛患者被随机分为手术治疗组(n = 51)和支架置入组(n = 51)。6个月时,定量冠脉造影显示手术后吻合口狭窄率为4%,支架置入术后再狭窄率为29% (P <.001)。围手术期事件在手术干预和支架置入之间没有显著差异。手术干预后死亡2例;支架置入后无患者死亡。6个月后,两组在主要的心脏或大脑不良事件和重复靶血管重建术的需要方面无显著差异。6个月后,两组患者的心绞痛复发、体力劳动能力和抗心绞痛药物的使用均无显著差异。结论:6个月后,对于孤立的左前降支近端高度狭窄的患者,手术干预的血管造影结果明显优于支架置入术。两种治疗方法的临床结果无显著差异。中华胸心外科杂志(英文版);2009;24 (4):391 - 391
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
Trainee involvement in intraoperative death disclosure: An educational imperative. Ethical Leadership in Cardiothoracic Surgery in an Era of Consolidation: A Framework for Trust, Transparency, and Workforce Stability. Vasopressin leads to a lower pulmonary vascular resistance than norepinephrine in vasoplegic patients-at least with simple statistics! The addition of computed tomography (CT) findings maintains the predictive performance of an existing X-ray-based donor lung acceptability score. Association of GLP-1 Inhibitors with Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery.
×
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:604180095
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