Surgical myocardial revascularization versus stents

OBJECTIVES: To compare coronary artery bypass to stenting in our institution, and to compare the studied samples for major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular outcomes. METHOD: An observational cohort study. We analyzed 202 patients undergoing coronary artery surgical revascularization versus stenting in our institution between January 17 and July 31, 2009; patients were stratified into: Group G1-STENT, patients who received stents; and Group G2-CABG, patients submitted to coronary artery by-pass grafting. A script containing 62 clinical, hemodynamic and surgical items was used for data collection from medical records. RESULTS:Womenmade up a higher percentage of G1-STENT 44% versus 26% in G2-CABG. Diabetics predominated in G2-CABG, 46% versus 29% in G1-STENT. Three or more coronary branches showed a higher percentage in G2CABG, 55% vs, 9.0%; in G1-STENT, 64% had only one coronary branch involvement. Non-elective procedures were higher for G1-STENT (21%vs. 9%).Worse postoperative renal function occurred inG2-CABG (15%vs. 2%). G1-STENT patients had shorter hospital time. Recurrence of angina was higher in patients in G1-STENT (11% vs. 2%) with no significant difference in hospital mortality. Postoperative quality of life increased from 45% to 55% in G2-CABG. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical revascularization is the best procedure for patients with multi vessel coronary disease, especially in diabetic patients: it allows a significantly more complete revascularization, reduces the number of readmissions due to cardiac causes, reduces the recurrence of angina and improves quality of life after surgery, with hospital and late mortality rates similar to those obtained through stenting.