Stable Ischemic Heart Disease: Medical Therapy With or Without Revascularization

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashish Sarraju ◽  
David J Maron

Coronary artery disease (CAD) poses a significant global public health burden. Patients with CAD who do not present with acute coronary syndromes are considered to have stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). Options for the management of SIHD are medical therapy including pharmacologic therapy and lifestyle modification and revascularization with either percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Guideline-directed medical therapy is recommended for all patients with SIHD. Aside from severe stenosis in an unprotected left main coronary artery, the role of routine revascularization in the management of SIHD is unclear. Early CABG trials from the 1970s and 1980s demonstrated prognostic benefit with CABG versus medical therapy, but these results have limited applicability in the setting of modern medical therapy, including the widespread use of statins and aspirin and intensive lifestyle interventions. Contemporary strategy trials examining PCI plus medical therapy versus medical therapy alone have not demonstrated prognostic benefit with the addition of PCI. The addition of revascularization offers consistent symptom and quality-of-life benefit compared with medical therapy alone based on trial data, though this benefit may be time limited with PCI. Thus, there is a state of equipoise regarding the addition of revascularization to guideline-directed medical therapy in the management of SIHD. Therefore, shared decision-making is key when determining the best management strategy for a patient with SIHD and should include discussion of expected risks and benefits based on high-quality evidence, costs, and patient preferences. This review contains 6 figures, 8 tables, and 55 references.  Key Words: angina, antianginal therapy, coronary artery disease, coronary artery bypass grafting, guideline-directed medical therapy, ischemia, optimal medical therapy, percutaneous coronary intervention, revascularization

Author(s):  
Ian C. Glenn ◽  
Gabriele M. Iacona ◽  
Abeel A. Mangi

AbstractThe debate over coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent placement for the treatment of stable multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) continues in spite of numerous studies investigating the issue. This paper reviews the most recent randomized control trials (RCT) and meta-analyses of pooled RCT data to help address this issue. General trends demonstrated that CABG was superior in all-cause mortality and fulfilling the need for repeat revascularization. These advantages tended to be more pronounced in multivessel CAD and diabetes, and less so in left main CAD. PCI showed a consistently lower rate of cerebrovascular events. CABG continues to offer significant advantages over PCI, even as drug-eluting stent technology continues to evolve. The ideal endpoint for comparing PCI and CABG remains to be determined. Furthermore, additional research is required to further refine patient selection criteria for each intervention.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document