Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs. percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the treatment of multivessel coronary disease: Quo vadis? -A review of the evidences on coronary artery disease

Cristiano Spadaccio, Umberto Benedetto*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)peer-review

18 Citations (Scopus)
240 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The optimal treatment of ischemic coronary artery disease (CAD) is still controversial. A number of randomized controlled trials (RCT) and several meta-analyses have been performed and are inspiring the current guidelines. However, a univocal consensus on the optimal therapeutic strategy for multivessel disease has still not been reached yet. We reviewed the current evidence on this topic, focusing on both RCT and meta-analyses. From both short and long-term studies, it emerges that in patients with multivessel disease, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is associated with better survival, lower rates of major cardiovascular events (specifically myocardial infarction or stroke) and repeat revascularization as compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)506-515
Number of pages10
JournalAnnals of Cardiothoracic Surgery
Volume7
Issue number4
Early online date27 Jul 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2018

Keywords

  • Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)
  • Multivessel disease (MVD)
  • Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs. percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the treatment of multivessel coronary disease: Quo vadis? -A review of the evidences on coronary artery disease'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this