Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Disclaimer
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Corr, L.A.
Right arrow Articles by Stables, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Corr, L.A.
Right arrow Articles by Stables, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


Coronary revascularization: knife or catheter?

L.A. Corr* and R. Stables

Cardiothoracic Department, Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospitals Trust, London, U.K.

* Dr Laura Corr, Cardiothoracic Department, Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospitals Trust, Lambeth Palace Road, London SE1 7EH, U.K.

Abstract

There is still debate about the optimal route for revascularization in multi-vessel disease. Several trials have tried to address this question but, in practice, percutaneous revascularization is growing in popularity. This article explores the evidence to date and possible future treatments, particularly for subgroups such as diabetes.

Key Words: Ischaemic heart disease • percutaneous coronary intervention • coronary artery bypass grafting

References

  1. SoS investigators. Coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (the Stent or Surgery trial): a randomized controlled trial. Lancet. 2002;360:965–970[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  2. Sermys PW, Unger F, Sousa JE, et al. Comparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:1117–1124[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Simoons M. Euro Heart Survey Program. BerlinPresented at the Annual Congress of the European Society of Cardiology. 2002.
  4. Hamm CW, Reimers J, Ischinger T, et al. A randomised study of coronary angioplasty compared with bypass surgery in patients with symptomatic multivessel coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:1037–1043[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. RITA Trial Participants. Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial. Lancet. 1993;341:573–580[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  6. King SB III, Lembo NJ, Weintraub WS, et al. A randomised trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:1044–1050[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. BARI Investigators. Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with angioplasty in patients with multivessel disease. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:217–225[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Rodriguez A, Boullon F, Perez-Balino N, Paviotti C, Sosa Liprandi MIERACI group. Argentine randomised trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI): In hospital results and 1-year follow-up. on behalf of theJ Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22:1060–1067[Abstract]
  9. CABRI trial participants. First year results of CABRI (Coronary Angioplasty Versus Bypass Revascularisation Investigation). Lancet. 1995;346:1179–1183[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  10. Pocock SJ, Henderson RA, Rickards AF, et al. Meta-analysis of randomised trials comparing coronary angioplasty with bypass surgery. Lancet. 1995;346:1184–1189[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  11. Rodriguez A, Bernardi V, Navia J, et al. Argentine Randomized Study: Coronary Angioplasty with Stenting Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery in Patients with Multi-vessel Disease (ERACI II): 30-day and one-year follow up results. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37:51–58[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Wallentin L, Lagerqvist B, Husted S, et al. Outcome at 1 year after an invasive compared with a non-invasive strategy in unstable coronary-artery disease: the FRISC II invasive randomised trial. FRISC II Investigators. Fast Revascularisation during Instability in Coronary artery disease. Lancet. 2000;356:9–16[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  13. Newman MF, Kirchner JL, Phillips-Bute B, et al. Longitudinal assessment of neurocognitive function after coronary-artery bypass surgery. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:395–402[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Weintaub WS. Neuropsychology in the SoS study. In: Symposium: coronary artery disease and percutanoeous coronary intervention. StockholmProgramme and abstracts of the XXIII Annual Congress of the ESC. 2001.
  15. Morice M-C, Serruys PW, Seruys JE, et al. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1773–1780[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Popma J. Final angiographic results of the SIRIUS Trial. Washington DCPresented at Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics. 2002.
  17. Colombo A. TAXUS II: 6 month results. Washington DCPresented at Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics. 2002.
  18. Mehta SR, Yusuf S, Peters RJG, et al, Clopidogrel in Unstable angina to prevent Recurrent Events trial (CURE) Investigators. Effects of pretreatment with clopidogrel and aspirin followed by long-term therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the PCI-CURE study. for theLancet. 2001;358:527–533[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  19. Marso S, Lincoff M, Ellis S, et al. Optimizing the percutaneous interventional outcomes for patients with diabetes mellitus: results of the EPISTENT (Evaluation of Platelet IIb/IIIa Inhibitor for Stenting Trial) diabetic substudy. Circulation. 1999;100:2477–2484[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Topol E, Mark D, Lincoff M, et al. Outcomes at one year and economic implications of platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa blockade in patients undergoing coronary stenting: results from a multicentre randomised trial. Lancet. 1999;354:2019–2024[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
  21. Cannon CP, Baim DS. Expanding the reach of primary percutaneous coronary intervention for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39:1720–1722[Free Full Text]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Disclaimer
Right arrow Request Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Corr, L.A.
Right arrow Articles by Stables, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Corr, L.A.
Right arrow Articles by Stables, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?