Comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention in native coronary arteries vs. bypass graft in patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery




Aim


Patients with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) represent a sizable portion of those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI): in many instances, it is unclear whether performing PCI on the bypass graft or in the native coronary vessels can offer the best risk–benefit balance.




Methods


We included patients with prior CABG undergoing PCI at our center between July 2002 and June 2004, and we distinguished them in three groups. Those in whom PCI was performed on stenotic saphenous vein graft (SVG group), those in whom PCI was performed on native vessels despite the presence of potentially treatable SVG disease (optional native group) and those in whom PCI had to be performed mandatorily in the native vessels because of chronic SVG occlusions or disease in nonbypassed segments (mandatory native group). The primary endpoint was long-term rate of major adverse clinical events (MACE; i.e., death, myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularization).

Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Related posts:

  1. Coronary stenting with MGuard: extended follow-up of first human trial
  2. Understanding the impact of drug-eluting stent on vascular function and the nitric oxide pathway genes using a pig coronary artery stent implantation model
  3. Treatment of STEMI with neither PCI nor thrombolysis
  4. Definite stent thrombosis: a 2-center New Zealand registry

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel
Tags:
Nov 16, 2017 | Posted by in CARDIOLOGY | Comments Off on Comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention in native coronary arteries vs. bypass graft in patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery

Full access? Get Clinical Tree
Get Clinical Tree app for offline access