Is percutaneous coronary intervention as effective as bypass surgery in left main stem coronary artery stenosis?

T. Stiermaier*, G. Schuler, E. Boudriot, S. Desch, H. Thiele

*Korrespondierende/r Autor/-in für diese Arbeit
1 Zitat (Scopus)

Abstract

Recent advances in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have rekindled interest in this treatment modality also in the setting of unprotected left main stenosis. Randomized trials reported a similar risk of death or myocardial infarction between PCI and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). However, rates of stroke were higher after CABG, whereas patients undergoing PCI had a higher risk of repeat revascularization. Although CABG remains the standard of care for left main stenosis in current guideline recommendations, PCI is considered a reasonable alternative in patients with low to intermediate anatomical complexity and at increased surgical risk. An interdisciplinary assessment is indispensable in order to choose the best treatment option for each individual patient.

OriginalspracheEnglisch
ZeitschriftHerz
Jahrgang38
Ausgabenummer2
Seiten (von - bis)147-152
Seitenumfang6
ISSN0340-9937
DOIs
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - 01.03.2013

Strategische Forschungsbereiche und Zentren

  • Forschungsschwerpunkt: Gehirn, Hormone, Verhalten - Center for Brain, Behavior and Metabolism (CBBM)

Fingerprint

Untersuchen Sie die Forschungsthemen von „Is percutaneous coronary intervention as effective as bypass surgery in left main stem coronary artery stenosis?“. Zusammen bilden sie einen einzigartigen Fingerprint.

Zitieren