Download PDF
Dtsch Med Wochenschr 2021; 146(16): 1051-1058
DOI: 10.1055/a-1241-6645
Dossier

Koronarrevaskularisation: Interventionelle Therapie versus Bypassoperation

Coronary revascularization: Interventional therapy or coronary bypass surgery
Michael Lehrke
,
Bernd Niemann
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Die koronare Herzkrankheit bleibt die häufigste Todesursache und ist für Myokardinfarkt, Herzinsuffizienz und Angina pectoris verantwortlich. Die Therapie kombiniert eine optimale Kontrolle von kardiovaskulären Risikofaktoren und koronare Revaskularisation durch interventionelle Therapie oder Bypassoperation. Welche Therapie in welchem Fall am besten zum Einsatz kommt, fasst dieser Beitrag zu den aktuellen Studien zusammen.

Abstract

Coronary artery disease remains the leading cause of death and is responsible for myocardial infarction, heart failure and angina. Therapy combines optimal control of cardiovascular risk factors with coronary revascularization performed by interventional therapy or bypass surgery. While interventional therapy is preferred for single or two vessel disease, interdisciplinary heart team decision should be reached for complex lesion, three vessel or left main disease. Both revascularization strategies perform similar for low level complexity three vessel or left main disease while coronary bypass surgery proved superior for more complex coronary artery disease. Heart team decision should be based on vascular anatomy and expected revascularization success under consideration of operative risk and patient preference.

Schlüsselwörter

perkutane Koronarintervention - Bypasschirurgie - Revaskularisation

Key words

percutaneous coronary intervention - coronary bypass surgery - revascularization


Publication History

Article published online:
20 August 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Shah PK. Mechanisms of plaque vulnerability and rupture. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 41 (04) 15S-22S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A. et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 2019; 40 (02) 87-165
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 De Bruyne B, Pijls NHJ. et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med 2009; 360 (03) 213-224
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Bangalore S, Maron DJ, Stone GW. et al. Routine Revascularization Versus Initial Medical Therapy for Stable Ischemic Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials. Circulation 2020; 142 (09) 841-857
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Crea F, Camici PG, Bairey Merz CN. Coronary microvascular dysfunction: an update. Eur Heart J 2014; 35 (17) 1101-1111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Yusuf S, Zucker D, Peduzzi P. et al. Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists Collaboration. Lancet 1994; 344: 563-570
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Maron DJ, Hochman JS, Reynolds HR. et al. Initial Invasive or Conservative Strategy for Stable Coronary Disease. N Engl J Med 2020; 382 (15) 1395-1407
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Fearon WF, Nishi T, De Bruyne B. et al. Clinical Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness of Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease: Three-Year Follow-Up of the FAME 2 Trial (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation). Circulation 2018; 137 (05) 480-487
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Zimmermann FM, Omerovic E, Fournier S. et al. Fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention vs. medical therapy for patients with stable coronary lesions: meta-analysis of individual patient data. Eur Heart J 2019; 40 (02) 180-186
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Frye RL, August P. BARI 2D Study Group. et al. A randomized trial of therapies for type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2009; 360 (24) 2503-2515
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Windecker S, Stortecky S, Stefanini GG. et al. Revascularisation versus medical treatment in patients with stable coronary artery disease: network meta-analysis. BMJ 2014; 348: g3859
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Doenst T, Haverich A, Serruys P. et al. PCI and CABG for Treating Stable Coronary Artery Disease: JACC Review Topic of the Week. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019; 73 (08) 964-976
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Bainey KR, Alemayehu W, Welsh RC. et al. Long-Term Clinical Outcomes Following Revascularization in High-Risk Coronary Anatomy Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease. J Am Heart Assoc 2021; 10 (01) e018104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Deutsche Gesellschaft für Kardiologie – Herz-und Kreislaufforschung e.V. ESC Pocket Guidelines. Myokardrevaskularisation. Grünwald: Börm Bruckmeier Verlag GmbH. 2019
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP. et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2009; 360 (10) 961-972
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Thuijs DJFM, Kappetein AP, Serruys PW. et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial. Lancet 2019; 394: 1325-1334
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Mohr FW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP. et al. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with three-vessel disease and left main coronary disease: 5-year follow-up of the randomised, clinical SYNTAX trial. Lancet 2013; 381: 629-638
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Park SJ, Ahn JM, Kim YH. et al. Trial of everolimus-eluting stents or bypass surgery for coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2015; 372 (13) 1204-1212
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Morice MC, Serruys PW, Kappetein AP. et al. Five-year outcomes in patients with left main disease treated with either percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting in the synergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with taxus and cardiac surgery trial. Circulation 2014; 129 (23) 2388-2394
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Ahn JM, Roh JH, Kim YH. et al. Randomized Trial of Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: 5-Year Outcomes of the PRECOMBAT Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015; 65 (20) 2198-2206
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Holm NR, Mäkikallio T, Lindsay MM. et al. Percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass grafting in the treatment of unprotected left main stenosis: updated 5-year outcomes from the randomised, non-inferiority NOBLE trial. Lancet 2020; 395: 191-199
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Holm RH, Mäkikallio T, Lindsay MM. et al. Percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass grafting in treatment of unprotected left main stenosis (NOBLE): a prospective, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2016; 388: 2743-2752
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Stone GW, Kappetein AP, Sabik JF. et al. Five-Year Outcomes after PCI or CABG for Left Main Coronary Disease. N Engl J Med 2019; 381 (19) 1820-1830
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Ahmad Y, Howard JP, Arnold AD. et al. Mortality after drug-eluting stents vs. coronary artery bypass grafting for left main coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur Heart J 2020; 41 (34) 3228-3235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Lopes RD, Alexander KP, Stevens SR. et al. Initial Invasive Versus Conservative Management of Stable Ischemic Heart Disease in Patients With a History of Heart Failure or Left Ventricular Dysfunction: Insights From the ISCHEMIA Trial. Circulation 2020; 142 (18) 1725-1735
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Velazquez EJ, Lee KL, Jones RH. et al. Coronary-Artery Bypass Surgery in Patients with Ischemic Cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med 2016; 374 (16) 1511-1520
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Wolff G, Dimitroulis D, Andreotti F. et al. Survival Benefits of Invasive Versus Conservative Strategies in Heart Failure in Patients With Reduced Ejection Fraction and Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis. Circ Heart Fail 2017; 10 (01) e003255
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Farkouh ME, Domanski M, Sleeper LA. et al. Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. N Engl J Med 2012; 367 (25) 2375-2384
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Ladwiniec A, Walsh SJ, Holm NR. et al. Intravascular ultrasound to guide left main stem intervention: a NOBLE trial substudy. EuroIntervention 2020; 16 (03) 201-209
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Gaudino MFL, Spadaccio C, Taggart DP. State-of-the-Art Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Patient Selection, Graft Selection, and Optimizing Outcomes. Interv Cardiol Clin 2019; 8 (02) 173-198
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Gaudino M, Alexander JH, Bakaeen FG. et al. Randomized comparison of the clinical outcome of single versus multiple arterial grafts: the ROMA trial-rationale and study protocol. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2017; 52 (06) 1031-1040
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Diegeler A, Börgermann J, Kappert U. et al. Off-pump versus on-pump coronary-artery bypass grafting in elderly patients. N Engl J Med 2013; 368 (13) 1189-1198
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar