[3-year results of the SYNTAX trial--stent or surgery? A surgeon's perspective].

Q1 Medicine
Lenard Conradi, Hermann Reichenspurner
{"title":"[3-year results of the SYNTAX trial--stent or surgery? A surgeon's perspective].","authors":"Lenard Conradi,&nbsp;Hermann Reichenspurner","doi":"10.1007/s11789-011-0023-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the standard of care for patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease. However, clinical practice has proven to differ substantially with even the most complex coronary lesions being targeted by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) today. An abundancy of both large registries and randomized clinical trials has demonstrated superiority of surgery over PCI in advanced coronary artery disease. Recently, these results have been confirmed by the landmark SYNTAX trial where CABG was found to be superior to PCI for three-vessel and/or left main coronary artery disease regarding repeat revascularization, rate of myocardial infarction, and cardiac mortality at the latest follow-up of 3 years. On the other hand, PCI proved to be a viable alternative for less complex forms of left main disease.In conclusion, patients with three-vessel and/or left main coronary artery disease should be discussed in an interdisciplinary heart team consisting of cardiologists and cardiac surgeons within a heart center. Final decision making should be a formal process as recommended in the recently updated guidelines on myocardial revascularization by the European Society of Cardiology.</p>","PeriodicalId":39208,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Research in Cardiology Supplements","volume":"6 ","pages":"43-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s11789-011-0023-5","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Research in Cardiology Supplements","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11789-011-0023-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the standard of care for patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease. However, clinical practice has proven to differ substantially with even the most complex coronary lesions being targeted by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) today. An abundancy of both large registries and randomized clinical trials has demonstrated superiority of surgery over PCI in advanced coronary artery disease. Recently, these results have been confirmed by the landmark SYNTAX trial where CABG was found to be superior to PCI for three-vessel and/or left main coronary artery disease regarding repeat revascularization, rate of myocardial infarction, and cardiac mortality at the latest follow-up of 3 years. On the other hand, PCI proved to be a viable alternative for less complex forms of left main disease.In conclusion, patients with three-vessel and/or left main coronary artery disease should be discussed in an interdisciplinary heart team consisting of cardiologists and cardiac surgeons within a heart center. Final decision making should be a formal process as recommended in the recently updated guidelines on myocardial revascularization by the European Society of Cardiology.

3年的SYNTAX试验结果——支架还是手术?[外科医生的观点]。
冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)是三支血管或左主干冠状动脉疾病患者的标准治疗方法。然而,临床实践已经证明,即使是最复杂的冠状动脉病变,经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)也有很大的不同。大量的大型登记和随机临床试验表明,在晚期冠状动脉疾病中,手术优于PCI。最近,具有里程碑意义的SYNTAX试验证实了这些结果,该试验发现,在最近3年的随访中,对于三支血管和/或左主干冠状动脉疾病,在重复血运重建、心肌梗死率和心脏死亡率方面,CABG优于PCI。另一方面,PCI被证明是左主干疾病不太复杂形式的可行替代方案。总之,患有三支血管和/或左主干冠状动脉疾病的患者应该在一个由心脏中心的心脏病专家和心脏外科医生组成的跨学科心脏小组中进行讨论。最后的决定应该是一个正式的过程,正如欧洲心脏病学会最近更新的心肌血运重建指南所建议的那样。
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
Clinical Research in Cardiology Supplements
Clinical Research in Cardiology Supplements Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信