EDITORIAL
Coronary artery bypass grafting: "stents" versus surgery
Domingo Marcolino Braile* * Director of the post graduation course of the Medical School in São José do Rio Preto (FAMERP), Professor of FAMERP and UNICAMP and editor of the Brazilian Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery (BJCVS)
It is unnecessary to reiterate that there is a high prevalence of coronary artery disease in the population. The risk increases with the patient's age and a reduction of certain diseases that were prevalent in the past. Surgeries for coronary artery bypass grafting are the most studied throughout the history of surgery and always presented with consistent results. The advent of angioplasty and, soon after, of conventional Stents followed by drug-eluting stents, changed concepts that had been very well established. A true boom occurred due to this technology, that is apparently less aggressive, in the belief that it would be possible to attain outcomes comparable to those achieved using coronary artery bypass graft surgery.
As with all new developments, there was a euphoric phase followed by doubt, uncertainty, disappointment, reflection and, finally, a period of stabilization with their use becoming more cautiously indicated (Fig. 1).
This was no difference with the utilization of stents, including drug-eluting stents. Most surgeons have observed that, in spite of interesting short-term results with the dilatation of coronary arteries and stent implantation, these are not maintained over midium-term and long-terms (Fig. 2), in particular due to re-stenosis and generalized inflammatory processes [1].
The new techniques developed and used by hemodynamicists to reduce complications of conventional stents, resulted in the development of drug-eluting stents. These were imagined, by some, to be the definitive solution, avoiding the feared re-stenosis as is seen in 20% to 40%, of cases using conventional stents depending on the which artery is treated and on the author [3].
In a recent metanalysis analyzing the incidence of infarction and mortality [2] it was clear that the use of drug-eluting stents did not offer any advantages over conventional stents (Figures 3 and 4).
In a work by Ben-Gal et al. in 2006 [4], "Drug-eluting stents versus arterial myocardial revascularization in patients with diabetes mellitus", it is evident that there is an advantage of coronary artery bypass grafting over drug-eluting stents in diabetic patients (Fig. 5).
Thus, it is clear that drug-eluting stents do not provide a better outcome when compared to conventional stents that continue to present with a serious problem of restenosis.
Recent data from Ong & Serruys [5] showed the advantage of coronary artery bypass grafting over stents even when revascularization is not total (Fig. 6).
There is still a concern about the high risk in the use of drug-eluting stents because of a possibility of acute thrombosis leading to severe infarction and possible death [7]. This fact has already seen highlighted in the media [8].
In conclusion, I transcribe here a free adaptation of some topics presented by Dr. Salim Yussuf in his conference at the World Congress of Cardiology in August 2006 in Barcelona.
Conservative treatments should be called AGGRESSIVE THERAPY;
MACE (Major Adverse Cardiac Events) is an artificial event caused totally by ANGIOPLASTISTS;
If angioplasty or stent implantation is not performed, RE-STENOSIS IS ZERO;
Angioplasty or stent implantation is the same as a surgeon removing breast cancer leaving behind the METASTATIC DISEASE;
Luminology is similar to Astrology;
We were seduced by concern with angioplasty and stents.
"THIS PERVERTED ALL CARDIOLOGY"
I allow readers to come to their own conclusions about these current data, in order that they can evaluate the best indication in the treatment of coronary patients.
REFERENCES
1. Gomes WJ, Giannotti-Filho O, Hossne NA Jr, Catani R, Buffolo E. Inflammatory reaction after sirolimus-eluting stent implant. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005;80(5):1903-4.
2. Guyton RA. Coronary artery bypass is superior to drug-eluting stents in multivessel coronary artery disease. Ann Thorac Surg. 2006;81(6):1949-57.
3. Feres F, Abizaid A, Sousa AGMR. Sousa JE. Redução da proliferação neo-intimal após o implante de stents revestidos com rapamicina. Rev Soc Cardiol Estado de São Paulo. 2002;12(2):259-73.
4. Ben-Gal Y, Mohr R, Uretzky G, Medalion B, Hendler A, Hansson N, et al. Drug-eluting stents versus arterial myocardial revascularization in patients with diabetes mellitus. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2006;132(4):861-6.
5. Ong ATL, Serruys PW. Complete revascularization: coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation. 2006;114(3):249-55.
6. van den Brand MJ, Rensing BJ, Morel MA, Foley DP, de Valk V, Breeman A, et al. The effect of completeness of revascularization on event-free survival at one year in the ARTS trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39(4):559-64.
7. Iakovou I, Schmidt T, Bonizzoni E, Ge L, Sangiorgi GM, Stankovic G, et al. Incidence, predictors, and outcome of thrombosis after successful implantation of drug-eluting stents. JAMA. 2005;293(17):2126-30.
8. Bonnier H. DES: concerns over late-stent thrombosis. Cardiovascular News International 2006; Issue 2, Aug-Oct, p.2-3.
Publication Dates
-
Publication in this collection
11 Sept 2007 -
Date of issue
Dec 2006
