Need for repeat revascularisation in hybrid coronary revascularisation vs. percutaneous coronary intervention
Łukasz Szymański1, Natalia Gołąbek2, Jakub Piórek1
1Department of Cardiology, Collegium Medicum, Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski Krakow University, Krakow, Poland.
Insights
Hybrid coronary revascularisation (HCR) may reduce repeat revascularisation compared to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) alone. However, outcomes vary, with some studies showing no significant difference between these advanced cardiac procedures.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Medicine
- Interventional Cardiology
- Surgical Innovation
Background:
- Multi-vessel coronary artery disease necessitates complex treatment strategies.
- Hybrid coronary revascularisation (HCR) combines coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
- Limited comparative data exists on repeat revascularisation (RR) after HCR versus PCI.
Purpose of the Study:
- To review and summarize recent (2018-2023) evidence comparing repeat revascularisation (RR) rates after HCR versus PCI.
- To evaluate the effectiveness of HCR in reducing the need for subsequent revascularisation procedures.
Main Methods:
- Systematic literature search of PubMed and Embase databases.
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria applied to identify relevant studies.
- Analysis of 7 studies comparing HCR and PCI regarding repeat revascularisation (RR) and/or target vessel revascularisation (TVR).
Main Results:
- Three out of seven studies reported significantly lower RR and/or TVR rates for HCR compared to PCI.
- Four studies found no statistically significant differences in RR or TVR rates between HCR and PCI.
- HCR showed a potential advantage in reducing the need for follow-up TVR/RR in some patient cohorts.
Conclusions:
- HCR may offer benefits in reducing repeat revascularisation in select patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease.
- The comparative effectiveness of HCR versus PCI regarding repeat procedures is not definitively established across all studies.
- Further research is needed to clarify the complex outcomes associated with HCR and PCI.
Abstract:
Hybrid coronary revascularisation (HCR), being a treatment path combining both coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) approaches, offers the advantages of both methods in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease. Since available literature provides few studies comparing the need for repeat revascularisation (RR) after HCR in comparison to PCI, our review aimed at summarising the latest data on this topic from the last 5 years (2018-2023). The search was conducted within the PubMed and Embase databases, followed by application of inclusion and exclusion criteria and providing a summary of data and characteristics of eligible studies. On the basis of 7 records included in the final analysis, RR and/or follow-up target vessel revascularisation (TVR) were significantly less frequently required in the case of HCR than in PCI in 3 out of 7 records, whereas the remaining four provided no significant differences in analysed rates between the 2 therapeutic pathways. When it comes to lowering the necessity for follow-up TVR and/or RR in a fraction of instances, HCR demonstrates a significant advantage over PCI. The complexity of outcomes associated with these therapies is emphasised by the fact that no statistically significant differences were observed between the 2 methods in the remaining 4 records.
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Cardiomyopathy V: Interprofessional Care
Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care
Peripheral Artery Disease V: Postoperative Nursing Management
Varicose Veins II: Diagnostic Studies and Interprofessional Care


