Left main revascularization guidelines: navigating the data.

IF 2 4区医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS

Current Opinion in Cardiology Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-20 DOI:10.1097/HCO.0000000000001160

Aurelien Vallée, Kenza Rahmouni, Menaka Ponnambalam, Hugo Issa, Marc Ruel

{"title":"Left main revascularization guidelines: navigating the data.","authors":"Aurelien Vallée, Kenza Rahmouni, Menaka Ponnambalam, Hugo Issa, Marc Ruel","doi":"10.1097/HCO.0000000000001160","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose of review: This article explores recent developments in left main revascularization, with a focus on appraising the latest American and European guidelines.Recent findings: Recent pooled data analysis from four major randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for left main coronary artery stenosis indicate an advantage for CABG over PCI in regard to freedom from major adverse cardiovascular events, despite no significant difference in mortality observed at 5 years. Additional data support the use of CABG for patients with left ventricular dysfunction, complex left main lesions, diffuse coronary disease, and diabetes.Summary: The data underpinning the guidelines on each revascularization modality (PCI versus CABG) must consider factors such as lesion complexity, diabetes, and left ventricular dysfunction. Additionally, the findings of the four major RCTs upon which the guidelines are based must be ascertained in light of the latest advancements in these revascularization techniques.","PeriodicalId":55197,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Cardiology","volume":" ","pages":"437-443"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HCO.0000000000001160","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: This article explores recent developments in left main revascularization, with a focus on appraising the latest American and European guidelines.

Recent findings: Recent pooled data analysis from four major randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for left main coronary artery stenosis indicate an advantage for CABG over PCI in regard to freedom from major adverse cardiovascular events, despite no significant difference in mortality observed at 5 years. Additional data support the use of CABG for patients with left ventricular dysfunction, complex left main lesions, diffuse coronary disease, and diabetes.

Summary: The data underpinning the guidelines on each revascularization modality (PCI versus CABG) must consider factors such as lesion complexity, diabetes, and left ventricular dysfunction. Additionally, the findings of the four major RCTs upon which the guidelines are based must be ascertained in light of the latest advancements in these revascularization techniques.

查看原文本刊更多论文

左主干血管重建指南：数据导航。

综述目的：本文探讨了左主干血运重建的最新进展，重点评估了最新的美国和欧洲指南：最近的研究结果：针对左主干冠状动脉狭窄的四项主要随机对照试验（RCTs）的汇总数据分析显示，在避免主要不良心血管事件方面，CABG 比 PCI 更有优势，尽管在 5 年的死亡率方面没有观察到显著差异。其他数据支持对左心室功能障碍、左主干病变复杂、弥漫性冠状动脉疾病和糖尿病患者使用 CABG。摘要：每种血管重建方式（PCI 与 CABG）指南的基础数据必须考虑病变复杂性、糖尿病和左心室功能障碍等因素。此外，还必须根据这些血管重建技术的最新进展来确定指南所依据的四项主要 RCT 研究结果。

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分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Current Opinion in Cardiology 医学-心血管系统

CiteScore

4.20

自引率

4.30%

发文量

审稿时长

6-12 weeks

期刊介绍： Current Opinion in Cardiology is a bimonthly publication offering a unique and wide ranging perspective on the key developments in the field. Each issue features hand-picked review articles from our team of expert editors. With fourteen disciplines published across the year – including arrhythmias, molecular genetics, HDL cholesterol and clinical trials – every issue also contains annotated reference detailing the merits of the most important papers.