• Umberto Benedetto, Shahzad G Raja, Rafik F B Soliman, Alberto Albanese, Anand Jothidasan, Charles D Ilsley, Mohamed Amrani, and Harefield Cardiac Outcomes Research Group.
• Department of Cardiac Surgery, Harefield Hospital, London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: umberto.benedetto@hotmail.com.
• J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2014 Oct 1; 148 (4): 1316-22.

ObjectivesMinimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) has been proposed to reduce surgical morbidity and improve long-term outcomes compared with stenting in the treatment of isolated proximal left anterior descending artery. However, the survival benefit from MIDCAB still needs to be demonstrated, in particular, because percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DES-PCI) continues to be considered the initial treatment strategy. We conducted a 10-year follow-up, single-center, propensity score-matched MIDCAB versus DES-PCI comparison.MethodsA total of 1033 patients (303 MIDCAB and 730 DES-PCI) with isolated proximal left anterior descending disease were included. Propensity score matching was used to compare 303 pairs of MIDCAB and DES-PCI patients.ResultsMIDCAB and DES-PCI presented with comparable 30-day mortality (2 of 303 [0.6%] vs 1 of 303 [0.3%]; P=1.0). At 10 years, DES-PCI was associated with a 2.19-fold increased risk of late death (95% confidence interval, 1.15-4.17), a 2.0-fold increased risk of repeat revascularization (95% confidence interval, 1.20-3.47), and a 2.14-fold increased risk of the composite of death and repeat revascularization (95% confidence interval, 1.41-3.24).ConclusionsThese findings strongly support a survival benefit from MIDCAB at long-term follow-up compared with DES-PCI in the treatment of isolated left anterior descending disease.Copyright © 2014 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

29 keywords...

hide…