ライフサイエンスコーパス: CABG

1 CABG + OMT reduced the primary endpoint during long-term

2 CABG + OMT was also superior to OMT alone for prevention

3 CABG added to MED has a consistent beneficial effect on

4 CABG added to MED has a more substantial benefit on all-

5 CABG can be performed with relatively low 30-day mortali

6 CABG patients (n = 86,244) and PCI patients (n = 103,549

7 CABG-related bleeding (BARC 4) occurred in 155 (1.2%) pa

8 ide, population-based cohort study on 51 307 CABG patients and 513 070 individuals from the general p

9 eria (1351 everolimus-eluting stent and 3265 CABG), propensity score matching identified 2126 patient

10 Among the 973 CABG and 2255 PCI patients, Kaplan-Meier major adverse c

11 After aggregating across CABG episodes in a year to construct the physician socia

12 After CABG, 49.4% of deaths were cardiovascular, with the grea

13 In the first 30 days after CABG, SCD (n=5) accounted for 7% of all deaths.

14 e than doubled the risk of early death after CABG.

15 andomized cohort, there were 97 deaths after CABG and 123 deaths after PCI during a 5-year follow-up.

16 erences in outcome in women versus men after CABG, little is known about the sex-specific incidence a

17 poor short-term and long-term outcomes after CABG regardless of preoperative EF.

18 timing, and clinical predictors of SCD after CABG.

19 The monthly risk of SCD shortly after CABG among patients with a low left ventricular ejection

20 compare post-operative outcomes between all CABG techniques, including anaortic off-pump CABG (anOPC

21 4 and 1, respectively; log-rank P=0.005) and CABG (68% versus 48% for quartiles 4 and 1, respectively

22 the OPCABG-PC (7.4% vs. 6.5%; p = 0.02) and CABG (7.4% vs. 3.2%; p = 0.001) patients.

23 CABG), revascularization (PCI or CABG), and CABG were evaluated with reference to 3 calendar year pe

24 exceeding the limit for non-inferiority, and CABG was significantly better than PCI (p=0.0066).

25 Percutaneous coronary intervention and CABG show comparable safety in patients with LMCA stenos

26 Percutaneous coronary intervention and CABG were associated with a comparable risk of all-cause

27 articipating hospitals in the use of PCI and CABG (range: 22%-100%; 0%-78%, respectively; P value <0.

28 Patients <75 years assigned to PCI and CABG experienced a sustained frailty reduction, whereas

29 We aimed to compare PCI and CABG for treatment of left main coronary artery disease.

30 rmed for randomized trials comparing PCI and CABG for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis.

31 optimal medical therapy, outcomes of PCI and CABG may not differ; however, among nonadherent patients

32 f EXCEL, these findings suggest that PCI and CABG provide similar intermediate-term outcomes for pati

33 g selected patients with LMCAD, both PCI and CABG result in similar QoL improvement through 36 months

34 Differences between PCI and CABG were assessed using longitudinal random-effect grow

35 Over 36 months, both PCI and CABG were associated with significant improvements in Qo

36 1.97; P=0.53) did not differ between PCI and CABG.

37 nce in myocardial infarction between PCI and CABG.

38 significant QoL differences between PCI and CABG.

39 arization) and repeat revascularization, and CABG was associated with higher risk of stroke.

40 PCI using drug-eluting stents and CABG are equally safe methods of revascularization for p

41 g-eluting stents is as safe and effective as CABG for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary

42 ents with T1DM, poor glycemic control before CABG was associated with increased long-term risk of dea

43 ath were not significantly different between CABG and PCI (11.4% vs. 13.9%, respectively; p = 0.10),

44 atients with 3-vessel or left main CAD, both CABG and DES-PCI were associated with substantial and su

45 In patients who were re-vascularized by CABG, mortality and major adverse cardiac events were si

46 ng stents (PCI group, 948 patients) or CABG (CABG group, 957 patients).

47 In diabetic patients with MV-CAD, CABG was associated with a lower rate of long-term MACCE

48 women [31%]) included in the study, combined CABG and valve repair or replacement surgery comprised 7

49 Within 30 days, CABG patients had a 25-fold, a 26-fold, and a 18-fold hi

50 work together in tightly-knit groups during CABG episodes realize better surgical outcomes.

51 ition of Perioperative Bleeding (UDPB) and E-CABG bleeding classification criteria.

52 risk of bleeding according to the UDPB and E-CABG bleeding classifications, but the incidence of plat

53 (22.7% [5 of 22] vs 6.4% [12 of 187]) and E-CABG bleeding grades 2 and 3 (18.2% [4 of 22] vs 5.9% [1

54 Study on Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (E-CABG) registry between January and September 2015.

55 Results: Of 2482 patients from the E-CABG registry, the study cohort included 786 (31.7%) con

56 nts with 3-vessel or left main CAD to either CABG or DES-PCI.

57 omly assigned 301 patients to undergo either CABG alone or the combined procedure.

58 Emergent CABG within 24 hours of non-ST-segment-elevation myocard

59 CS patients the odds ratio for MACCE favored CABG 0.49 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34 to 0.71),

60 lyses in propensity-matched patients favored CABG (93.2% versus 89.3%; 86.6% versus 80.3%; 80.8% vers

61 he subgroup on dialysis, the results favored CABG over PCI.

62 e FI scores were 0.170, 0.154, and 0.154 for CABG, PCI, and medical therapy only, respectively.

63 CE were 29% for PCI (121 events) and 19% for CABG (81 events), HR 1.48 (95% CI 1.11-1.96), exceeding

64 7 for colectomy, P = .16; $3175 vs $3064 for CABG, P = .67; and $1373 vs $1514 for THR, P = .93).

65 s $29250 for colectomy, $44777 vs $47675 for CABG, and $24553 vs $27927 for THR; P < .001 for all).

66 for colectomy, P < .001; $6015 vs $6355 for CABG, P = .14; and $7132 vs $9552 for THR, P < .001) or

67 Adjusted costs were higher for CABG for the index hospitalization, study period, and li

68 years, FI scores increased postbaseline for CABG and medical therapy only and after 6 months for PCI

69 hin 24 h, being considered too high risk for CABG or PCI, or expected survival of less than 1 year.

70 We randomly assigned patients scheduled for CABG to undergo single or bilateral internal-thoracic-ar

71 erence in the SAQ angina frequency score for CABG vs. PCI of -0.9, 3.3, and 3.9 points for low, inter

72 medical therapy among patients suitable for CABG.

73 ho derive the greatest clinical benefit from CABG are also at the greatest operative risk, which make

74 T1D and multivessel disease may benefit from CABG compared with PCI.

75 nts who have a greater survival benefit from CABG.

76 ents who had a greater survival benefit from CABG; and 3) whether CABG improved angina in patients wi

77 r) versus surgery in which it was not (e.g., CABG) and perioperative bleeding increased the risk of R

78 In general, CABG resulted in greater angina relief, although the abs

79 ion (PCI), and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) are an unintended consequence of public reporting

80 502 days), noncoronary artery bypass graft (CABG) bleeding occurred in 1,998 (15.4%) patients accord

81 ) treated with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using

82 n (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) routinely exclude patients with chronic kidney dis

83 outcomes with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery compared with percutaneous coronary interv

84 compared with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery in patients with chronic kidney disease.

85 on with either coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI

86 c benefit from coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery than those without angina.

87 after elective coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.

88 ortality after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.

89 have compared coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) with percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) for

90 (ie, combined coronary artery bypass graft [CABG] surgery and valve repair or replacement surgery, t

91 scularization (coronary artery bypass graft [CABG]) over percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in

92 tment (ie, 128 coronary artery bypass graft [CABG], 150 percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], 96

93 hospitals), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (218940 patients at 1056 hospitals), or total hip

94 strategy of coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) added to guideline-directed medical therapy, as co

95 l comparing coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) alone with CABG plus mitral-valve repair in patien

96 uitable for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are at higher risk for surgical morbidity and mort

97 undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are limited and inconclusive.

98 of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are the subject of speculation.

99 or without coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2007 and 2011.

100 ng isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) compared with aspirin alone.

101 who undergo coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) following acute coronary syndromes (ACS).

102 ) stenosis, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been the standard therapy for several decades.

103 Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the standard treatment for revascularisation in

104 rteries for coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) may improve long-term outcomes as compared with th

105 undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) must often see multiple providers dispersed across

106 n by either coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) carrie

107 unknown if coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may of

108 th previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial in

109 of on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) procedures.

110 Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains the standard of treatment for 3-vessel and

111 uggest that coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) should be the preferred revascularization method f

112 Coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery may be performed either with cardiopulmona

113 eriority of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery over percutaneous coronary intervention (P

114 ve compared coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

115 on (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), on long-term outcomes with respect to LVEF and nu

116 undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), only the activation of signal transducer and acti

117 reated with coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG).

118 tions after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

119 comes after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

120 related to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG; major, minor, or requiring medical attention) up t

121 (CTOs) after coronary artery bypass grafts (CABGs) is higher than in non-CABG population.

122 pared with CTO PCI in patients who never had CABG.

123 In total, 13 226 patients had CABG: 5882 had OPCAB and 7344 had CPB, with a median fol

124 However, CABG has not been compared with PCI in such patients in

125 However, CABG is associated with significantly lower rates of rep

126 before/after ischemic cardioplegic arrest in CABG patients.

127 aracteristics of new-onset AF after isolated CABG show that women had lower adjusted risk for post-CA

128 a retrospective cohort study of all isolated CABG at our institution from 2001 to 2015.

129 y adjusted mortality rate ratio for isolated CABG surgery was 13.51 (95% confidence interval [CI], 12

130 risk was higher in patients having isolated CABG surgery than in the general population, particularl

131 all patients who underwent primary isolated CABG between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2013, fro

132 The isolated CABG cohort had a higher mortality rate than the general

133 to 364 days and 1 to 10 years, the isolated CABG surgery cohort had a slightly higher mortality rate

134 s were patients with ACS undergoing isolated CABG from the European Multicenter Study on Coronary Art

135 s without preoperative AF underwent isolated CABG from 2002 to 2010 at 4 US academic medical centers

136 respective propensity-matched SA-CABG and MA-CABG cohorts.

137 ows: versus SA-CABG, HR: 0.87; and versus MA-CABG, HR: 0.38.

138 bypass grafts (CABGs) is higher than in non-CABG population.

139 TIMI non-CABG clinically significant bleeding was similar with ri

140 f mortality increased progressively with non-CABG BARC grades.

141 who underwent primary isolated nonemergency CABG in Sweden between 1997 and 2012, according to the S

142 Furthermore, the use of PCI, but not CABG, increased modestly over the past 6 years.

143 (Pinteraction=0.062), whereas the benefit of CABG on cardiovascular mortality was consistent over all

144 ears, the late (31-day to 5-year) benefit of CABG over PCI no longer varied by acuity of presentation

145 .9%-Stage 2; 0.8%-Stage 3) within 30 days of CABG.

146 The effect of CABG versus MED on all-cause mortality tended to diminis

147 his study examined the cost-effectiveness of CABG versus PCI for stable ischemic heart disease.

148 Whether the efficacy of CABG compared with medical therapy (MED) in patients wit

149 A prior history of CABG in patients presenting with STEMI and undergoing PP

150 010 to December 2015 depending on history of CABG.

151 dical therapy on the comparative outcomes of CABG versus PCI remains to be defined.

152 y and long-term outcomes similar to those of CABG performed after 3 days, despite a higher risk profi

153 A well-powered randomized trial of CABG versus PCI in the ACS population is warranted becau

154 Factors associated with use of CABG versus PCI were identified using logistic multivari

155 4 and 1, respectively; log-rank P=0.388) or CABG group (39% versus 35% for quartiles 4 and 1, respec

156 -eluting stents (PCI group, 948 patients) or CABG (CABG group, 957 patients).

157 ll remain to be addressed: What about PCI or CABG with a low versus a high score respectively?

158 fferent methods of revascularization (PCI or CABG) against each other or medical treatment in patient

159 on, PCI, or CABG), revascularization (PCI or CABG), and CABG were evaluated with reference to 3 calen

160 and randomised 1:1 to treatment with PCI or CABG.

161 management (cardiac catheterization, PCI, or CABG), revascularization (PCI or CABG), and CABG were ev

162 either PCI with everolimus-eluting stent or CABG were selected from the New York State registries.

163 Overall CABG volume decreased (5551 in 1998 vs 3857 in 2012; R(2

164 In propensity-matched patients, CABG outcomes were superior to PCI outcomes in patients

165 differ; however, among nonadherent patients, CABG affords better major adverse cardiac event-free sur

166 When compared with PCI, CABG still showed a survival benefit (hazard ratio, 0.82

167 iod, 309 CPs were recorded during 59 644 PCI-CABG procedures with the incidence rising from 0.32% in

168 METHODS AND Data were analyzed on all PCI-CABG procedures performed in England and Wales between 2

169 CP is an infrequent event during PCI-CABG but is closely associated with adverse clinical out

170 e, predictors, and outcomes of CP during PCI-CABG were defined.

171 story of coronary artery bypass surgery (PCI-CABG) is limited and the long-term effects unclear.

172 ution has >15 years of experience performing CABG both off-pump (OPCAB) and on cardiopulmonary bypass

173 f teamwork between health systems performing CABG (SD for the bipartite clustering coefficient was 0.

174 Post-CABG CTO PCI is associated with similar high success and

175 Post-CABG patients (175 cases) had a higher J-CTO score (2.5

176 ion rates and associated outcomes among post-CABG patients with diabetes.

177 With multivariable analysis, post-CABG status was associated with higher incidence of 1-ye

178 At 30 days post-CABG, 544 (68.4%) patients received DAPT and 251 (31.6%)

179 e use of DAPT in patients with diabetes post-CABG in our cohort was high.

180 women had significantly lower risk for post-CABG AF (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]=0.75 [0.64

181 that women had lower adjusted risk for post-CABG AF and experienced shorter episodes.

182 trast-induced nephropathy was higher in post-CABG patients (4.6% versus 1%; P=0.01).

183 Unadjusted incidence of post-CABG AF was 29.5% (3312/11 236) overall, 30.2% (2485/821

184 ecific incidence and characteristics of post-CABG AF.

185 O PCI via saphenous vein grafts (19% of post-CABG cases) versus collateral channels (36%) versus with

186 ere augmented with details on new-onset post-CABG AF events detected via continuous in-hospital ECG/t

187 ercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) post-CABG versus without CABG.

188 otherapy respectively, in subgroups with pre-CABG ACSs (15.2% vs. 16.5%; HR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.53 to 2.

189 EMI undergoing PPCI with or without previous CABG surgery in a large real-world, all-comer population

190 TEMI studied, 2658 (3.4%) patients had prior CABG, of whom 44% (n=1168) underwent PPCI to native vess

191 to bypass graft) than patients with no prior CABG (4.5%; P<0.001).

192 Patients with prior CABG (with primary PCI to native artery or graft) had hi

193 CABG techniques, including anaortic off-pump CABG (anOPCABG), off-pump with the clampless Heartstring

194 In this randomized trial, off-pump CABG led to lower rates of 5-year survival and event-fre

195 enters to undergo either on-pump or off-pump CABG, with 1-year assessments completed by May 2008.

196 teness of revascularization, and in off-pump CABG.

197 ans Affairs trial of on-pump versus off-pump CABG.

198 mergent, first-time, arrested-heart, on-pump CABG at a single US major academic, tertiary/quaternary

199 l clamp (OPCABG-PC), and traditional on-pump CABG with aortic cross-clamping.

200 In this contemporary study of on-pump CABG, we did not identify any significant differences in

201 l and freedom from reintervention as on-pump CABG.

202 urvival and event-free survival than on-pump CABG.

203 46 months, 113 of 1411 patients who received CABG without (n = 934) or with (n = 477) surgical ventri

204 11.9%, respectively (P=0.39); and for repeat CABG, the rate was 1.4% and 0.5%, respectively (P=0.02).

205 ted the impact of mode of revascularization (CABG vs. PCI with drug-eluting stents) in diabetic patie

206 th from any cause, repeat revascularization (CABG or percutaneous coronary intervention), or nonfatal

207 DES-PCI to respective propensity-matched SA-CABG and MA-CABG cohorts.

208 azard ratios (HR) were as follows: versus SA-CABG, HR: 0.87; and versus MA-CABG, HR: 0.38.

209 were in the highest-RSMR tertile for SAVR + CABG and isolated SAVR procedures, respectively, while 2

210 Between the 2 revascularization strategies, CABG seems more favorable compared with PCI in this part

211 monly exceeded 25 miles: HCAHPS (39.2%), STS-CABG (62.7%), and US News Top Hospital (85.2%).

212 pitals were rated for HCAHPS (n = 4656), STS-CABG (n = 470), and US News Top Hospitals (n = 15).

213 eeded 25 miles commonly: HCAHPS (23.7%), STS-CABG (36.7%), US News Top Hospitals (81.8%).Significant

214 hospital (89.6%), but less commonly for STS-CABG (62.9%).

215 ing for coronary artery bypass grafting (STS-CABG), and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Ho

216 al timing of coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardi

217 th Taxus and coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG)] score is a decision-making tool in interventional

218 after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) has not been examined in a contemporary clinical t

219 after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) is associated with increased morbidity and poorer

220 ommend coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) over percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for

221 nth, PCI was associated with better QoL than CABG.

222 ivessel disease treated with PCI rather than CABG had less bleeding and acute kidney injury, greater

223 Our findings indicate that CABG may be the preferred strategy in patients with T1D

224 finding reinforcing the recommendation that CABG should be strongly preferred for such patients.

225 The findings of this study suggest that CABG might be better than PCI for treatment of left main

226 It has been suggested that CABG techniques that eliminate cardiopulmonary bypass an

227 wering, and beta-blocker therapy in both the CABG and PCI groups (P=0.001 for all 3 medications).

228 CI group and in 14.7% of the patients in the CABG group (difference, 0.7 percentage points; upper 97.

229 patients in the PCI group and in 7.9% in the CABG group (P<0.001 for noninferiority, P=0.008 for supe

230 atients in the PCI group and in 19.1% in the CABG group (P=0.01 for noninferiority, P=0.10 for superi

231 A total of 247 patients (40.5%) in the CABG group and 297 patients (49.3%) in the medical-thera

232 low-up of 10.6 years, 53% of patients in the CABG group and 45% in the PCI group died.

233 vent occurred in 359 patients (58.9%) in the CABG group and in 398 patients (66.1%) in the medical-th

234 uses occurred in 467 patients (76.6%) in the CABG group and in 524 patients (87.0%) in the medical-th

235 In the CABG group, cardiopulmonary bypass time or days in inten

236 ularization than with medical therapy in the CABG stratum (15.3% vs. 30.3%, p = 0.02), but not in the

237 arization and medical therapy, either in the CABG stratum (26.1% vs. 29.9%, p = 0.41) or in the PCI s

238 Patients in the CABG stratum had significantly higher SYNTAX scores: 36%

239 The rate of death was 10.6% in the CABG-alone group and 10.0% in the combined-procedure gro

240 per square meter of body-surface area in the CABG-alone group and 43.2+/-20.6 ml per square meter in

241 idual mitral regurgitation was higher in the CABG-alone group than in the combined-procedure group (3

242 signed to undergo CABG plus medical therapy (CABG group, 610 patients) or medical therapy alone (medi

243 ere randomly assigned, 598 to PCI and 603 to CABG, and 592 in each group entered analysis by intentio

244 g stents may be an acceptable alternative to CABG in selected patients with left main coronary diseas

245 tion </=35% and coronary disease amenable to CABG were randomized to CABG or MED in the STICH trial (

246 less and coronary artery disease amenable to CABG were randomly assigned to undergo CABG plus medical

247 everolimus-eluting stents was noninferior to CABG with respect to the rate of the composite end point

248 ssociated with similar long-term outcomes to CABG performed on CPB in our institution.

249 Non-inferiority of PCI to CABG required the lower end of the 95% CI not to exceed

250 disease amenable to CABG were randomized to CABG or MED in the STICH trial (Surgical Treatment for I

251 yocardial infarction, only one third undergo CABG during the index admission.

252 T1D who might not have been able to undergo CABG in the PCI group we found that PCI, compared with C

253 tients with LMCAD were randomized to undergo CABG or PCI, of whom 1,788 participated in the QoL subst

254 le to CABG were randomly assigned to undergo CABG plus medical therapy (CABG group, 610 patients) or

255 analyses among patients with ACS undergoing CABG, the use of preoperative ticagrelor with or without

256 ith elevated risk in young adults undergoing CABG.

257 analyze LV biopsies from patients undergoing CABG and from pigs undergoing coronary occlusion/reperfu

258 od of 4 years or longer, patients undergoing CABG had better outcomes but at higher costs than those

259 d long-term mortality of patients undergoing CABG surgery and a general population comparison cohort.

260 Among patients undergoing CABG, there was no significant difference between those

261 ional Medicare data from patients undergoing CABG.

262 ) and no change in the proportion undergoing CABG (36.1% to 34.7%; ptrend=0.88).

263 ate ischemic mitral regurgitation undergoing CABG, the addition of mitral-valve repair did not lead t

264 In total, 683 patients who underwent CABG and 1,863 patients who underwent PCI were included.

265 Among Medicare beneficiaries who underwent CABG between 2008 and 2011, we mapped relationships betw

266 r over 10 years among patients who underwent CABG in addition to receiving medical therapy than among

267 ent of Ischemic Heart Failure) who underwent CABG with or without surgical ventricular reconstruction

268 During a median 4.5-year follow-up, CABG + OMT was superior to PCI + OMT for the primary end

269 During a 5-year follow-up, CABG in comparison with PCI was associated with a signif

270 At 5-year follow-up, CABG was superior to DES-PCI on several SAQ domains incl

271 m quality-of-life benefits of DES-PCI versus CABG for patients with 3-vessel or left main CAD.

272 This study evaluated outcomes of PCI versus CABG in patients with CKD.

273 ent revascularization strategies (PCI versus CABG versus no revascularization) in diabetes mellitus p

274 Treatment with PCI versus CABG was an independent predictor of cardiac death (haza

275 ically associated with the use of PCI versus CABG, including anatomic severity of the disease, early

276 9-3.54; P<0.001; hazard ratio for PCI versus CABG=1.68, 95% confidence limits, 138-2.04; P<0.001).

277 And what about PCI with a low score versus CABG with a high score?

278 l trial, patients with LMCA stenosis, PCI vs CABG, exclusive use of drug-eluting stents, and clinical

279 erm safety of PCI with drug-eluting stent vs CABG in patients with LMCA stenosis.

280 r survival benefit from CABG; and 3) whether CABG improved angina in patients with LV systolic dysfun

281 ary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) alone with CABG plus mitral-valve repair in patients with moderate

282 At 30 days, treatment with PCI compared with CABG was associated with lower rates of major bleeding (

283 CI with a low SYNTAX score was compared with CABG with a high SYNTAX score, no significant difference

284 However, when compared with CABG, PCI was less effective (OR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.18-1.5

285 PCI, compared with CABG, was associated with a similar risk of all-cause mo

286 e PCI group we found that PCI, compared with CABG, was associated with higher rates and risks of coro

287 R: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.98) compared with CABG.

288 arable long-term survival in comparison with CABG.

289 [CI], 0.01-0.39; P=0.004) in comparison with CABG.

290 rily by a reduction in MI-related death with CABG compared with PCI (0.4% vs. 4.1%, respectively; p <

291 Angina relief at 5 years was enhanced with CABG among patients with high SYNTAX scores, a finding r

292 ality or cardiovascular hospitalization with CABG versus MED in younger compared with older patients

293 The risk of MACCE with CABG or PCI was compared using multivariable adjustment

294 gy (26% relative reduction in mortality with CABG versus percutaneous coronary intervention over 5 ye

295 Comparing PCI with CABG, 5 year estimates were 12% versus 9% (1.07, 0.67-1.

296 the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio with CABG vs. medical therapy, 0.84; 95% confidence interval

297 e was a significant mortality reduction with CABG (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-

298 y, of which 10 852 (36.4%) were treated with CABG, 13 760 (46.2%) were treated with PCI, and 5157 (17

299 16.9% (292 events) in patients treated with CABG.

300 intervention (PCI) post-CABG versus without CABG.