Objective: To compare long-term survival with multiple arterial coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (MultArt) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with multivessel disease (MVD).
Methods: We reviewed 12,615 patients with MVD with isolated primary CABG or PCI from 1993 to 2009. Patients with CABG (n = 6667) were grouped according to the number of arterial grafts into left internal thoracic artery (LITA)/saphenous vein (SV) (n = 5712) or MultArt (n = 955); patients with PCI (n = 5948) were grouped into balloon angioplasty (BA) (n = 1020), drug-eluting stent (DES) (n = 1686), and bare metal stent (BMS) (n = 3242).
Results: Unadjusted long-term survival was lower for CABG than PCI (15-year survival, 34% vs 46%; P < .001); however, in patients with MultArt, survival was greater than LITA/SV, BA, BMS (15-year survival, 65% vs 31%, 47%, 45%, respectively; P < .001), and DES (8-year survival, 87% vs 70%; P < .001). In matched analyses, 15-year survival of MultArt was higher than BA (66% vs 57%; P = .002), LITA/SV (64% vs 56%; P = .02), and BMS (5-year survival 94% vs 90%; P = .01), and similar to DES at 8 years. In multivariate analysis, compared with MultArt, LITA/SV had worse survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.52; P = .003). BMS (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80-0.94; P < .001) and DES (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.66-0.88; P < .001) had improved survival versus LITA/SV but not versus MultArt (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.94-1.34; P = .21, and HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.79-1.21; P = .83, respectively). Secondary analyses for treatment crossover indicated lower survival for LITA/SV versus MultArt and PCI.
Conclusions: In patients with MVD undergoing primary revascularization, MultArt increased survival benefit versus LITA/SV compared with PCI. Use of MultArt must increase.
Keywords: bypass grafting; coronary disease; revascularization; stents; survival.
Copyright © 2016 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.