SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.88 número2Marcadores angiográficos negativos en la intervención coronaria percutánea de las oclusiones totales crónicas índice de autoresíndice de assuntospesquisa de artigos
Home Pagelista alfabética de periódicos  

Serviços Personalizados

Journal

Artigo

Indicadores

Links relacionados

  • Não possue artigos similaresSimilares em SciELO

Compartilhar


Archivos de cardiología de México

versão On-line ISSN 1665-1731versão impressa ISSN 1405-9940

Resumo

LOPEZ-AGUILAR, Carlos et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention of unprotected left main coronary compared with coronary artery bypass grafting; 3 years of experience in the National Institute of Cardiology, Mexico. Arch. Cardiol. Méx. [online]. 2018, vol.88, n.2, pp.83-92. ISSN 1665-1731.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acmx.2016.07.003.

Background:

The best revascularisation method of the unprotected left main artery is a current and evolving topic.

Methods:

A total of 2439 percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) were registered during a 3-year period. The study included all the patients with PCI of the unprotected left main coronary (n = 48) and matched with patients who underwent coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) (n = 50). Major adverse cerebral and cardiac events (MACCE) were assessed within the hospital and in outpatients during a 16 month follow up.

Results:

The cardiovascular risk was greater in the PCI group; logEuroSCORE 16 ± 21 vs. 5 ± 6, P = .001; clinical Syntax 77 ± 74 vs 53 ± 39, P = .04. On admission, the PCI group of patients had a higher frequency of ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and cardiogenic shock. The MACCE were similar in both groups (14% vs. 18%, P = .64). STEMI was less frequent in the PCI group (0% vs. 10%, P = .03). Cardiovascular events were lower in the PCI group (2.3% vs. 18%, P = .01), and there was a decrease in general and cardiac mortality (2.3% vs. 12%, P = .08 y 2.3% vs. 8%, P = .24), on excluding the patients with cardiogenic shock as a presentation. MACCE were similar in both groups in the out-patient phase (15% vs. 12%, P = .46). Survival without MACCE, general and cardiac death were comparable between groups (log rank, P = .38, P = .44 and P = .16, respectively).

Conclusion:

Even though the clinical and periprocedural risk profile of the PCI patients were higher, the in-hospital and out-hospital efficacy and safety were comparable with CABG. © 2016 Instituto Nacional de Cardiología Ignacio Chávez. Published by Masson Doyma México S.A. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Palavras-chave : Percutaneous coronary intervention; Unprotected left main coronary artery; Coronary artery bypass grafting; Safety; Efficacy; Mexico.

        · resumo em Espanhol     · texto em Espanhol     · Espanhol ( pdf )