Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 5, 2026

Surgical Porcine Model of Chronic Myocardial Ischemia Treated by Exosome-laden Collagen Patch and Off-pump Coronary Artery Bypass Graft
Published on: September 15, 2023
[Revascularization of myocardium: coronary artery bypass grafting or stenting?]
Insights
Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) showed better long-term results than coronary angioplasty and stenting (CAS) over five years. CABG demonstrated superior survival rates and reduced instances of restenosis and angina compared to CAS, especially bare-metal stents.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Surgery
- Interventional Cardiology
- Clinical Outcomes Research
Context:
- Coronary heart disease (CHD) management involves surgical and interventional approaches.
- Long-term comparative data between coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and coronary angioplasty and stenting (CAS) are crucial for treatment decisions.
- Evaluating outcomes of different stenting technologies (drug-eluting vs. bare-metal) is essential.
Purpose:
- To conduct a comparative analysis of the 5-year clinical outcomes for patients with coronary heart disease treated with CABG versus CAS.
- To assess survival rates, restenosis, myocardial infarction, and angina pectoris incidence between CABG and different CAS groups.
- To compare the efficacy of drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents within the CAS cohort.
Summary:
- A 5-year follow-up of 1100 CHD patients revealed higher survival rates for CABG (85.9%) compared to CAS (84.1% for drug-eluting stents, 70.8% for bare-metal stents).
- Coronary angioplasty and stenting (CAS) showed higher rates of restenosis and myocardial infarction, particularly with bare-metal stents.
- Angina pectoris was significantly less frequent at 1 year in CABG patients (62%) than in CAS patients (46.7% and 24.3%).
Impact:
- Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) demonstrates a relatively better clinical effect over 5 years for coronary heart disease management.
- Newer generation drug-eluting stents show improved outcomes compared to bare-metal stents in CAS procedures.
- Findings support the consideration of CABG for long-term benefits in specific patient populations with coronary heart disease.
Abstract:
The aim of the study was comparative analysis of long-term results (5 years) after coronary angioplasty and stenting (CAS) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The results of the treatment of 1100 patients with coronary heart disease, operated since 1999 to 2006 year, were analyzed. 720 (65.5%) patients had undergone CABG (group 1), 226 (20.5%) had had an implantation of stents with pharmaceutical coverage (group 2) 154 (14%) had been implanted with stents without pharmaceutical coverage (group 3). Clinical examination as a rule had occurred before operation, 29-30 days after operation and in every 12 months after discharge from the hospital. Five years survival rate in group of CABG patients was 85.9% and in groups of CAS patients it was 84.1% and 70.8% respectively. Restenosis occurred more frequently in CAS patients: in group 2 in 18.1% patients, in group 3--in 70.1% In group of CABG patients acute myocardial infarction occurred in 11.9% cases to the end of 5th year, in groups 2 and 3 this index was 10.9% and 18.3% respectively. Angina pectoris was absent in 1 year in CABG patients (62%) than in CAS patients (46.7% and 24.3% in groups 2 and 3 respectively; p < 0.05). Comparing results of CAS with use of stents with and without pharmaceutical coverage, the best clinical result was in the group with implanted stents of new generation. Relatively better clinical effect during 5 years occurred in CABG patients.
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Angina IV: Management
Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care
Mitral Stenosis III: Medical Management
Acute Coronary Syndrome I: Introduction

