Minimally invasive surgery or stenting for left anterior descending artery disease – meta-analysis

Abstract

Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are both well-established minimally invasive revascularization strategies in patients with proximal left anterior descending (LAD) lesions. We aimed to evaluate the 20-years’ experience by performing a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing MIDCAB versus PCI in adults with proximal LAD disease. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane on October 1st, 2021 for articles published in the year 2000 or later. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included cardiac mortality, repeat target vessel revascularization (rTVR), myocardial infarction (MI), and cerebrovascular accident (CVA). Outcomes were analysed at short-term, mid-term, and long-term follow-up. Random effects meta-analyses were performed. Events were compared using risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Our search yielded 17 studies pooling 3847 patients. At short-term follow-up, cardiac mortality was higher with MIDCAB than with PCI (RR 7.30, 95% CI: 1.38 to 38.61). At long-term follow-up, MIDCAB showed a decrease in all-cause mortality (RR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.46 to 0.93). MIDCAB showed a decrease in rTVR at mid-term follow-up (RR 0.16, 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.23) and at long-term follow-up (RR 0.25, 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.38). MI and CVA comparisons were not significant. In conclusion, in patients with proximal LAD lesions, MIDCAB showed a higher short-term mortality in the RCTs, but the cohort studies suggested a lower all-cause mortality at long-term follow-up. We confirm a decreased rTVR at mid-term follow-up in the RCTs and long-term follow-up in the cohort studies.

Keywords

• Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass
• Percutaneous coronary intervention
• Proximal LAD lesion
• Meta-analysis