Comparison of Bare-Metal Stenting With Minimally Invasive Bypass Surgery for Stenosis of the Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery : 10-Year Follow-Up of a Randomized Trial

ObjectivesThe aim of this prospective, randomized trial was to assess the 10-year long-term safety and effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery (MIDCAB) for the treatment of proximal left anterior descending (LAD) lesions.BackgroundLong-term follow-up data comparing PCI and MIDCAB surgery for isolated proximal LAD lesions are sparse.MethodsPatients with significant isolated proximal LAD stenoses were randomized either to PCI with bare-metal stents (n = 110) or MIDCAB (n = 110). At 10 years, data were obtained with respect to the primary endpoint (death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization). Angina was assessed by the Canadian Cardiovascular Society classification.ResultsFollow-up was conducted for 212 patients at a median time of 10.3 years. There were no significant differences in the binary primary composite endpoint (47% vs. 36%; p = 0.12) and hard endpoints (death and infarction) between PCI and MIDCAB. However, a higher target vessel revascularization rate in the PCI group (34% vs. 11%; p < 0.01) was observed. Clinical symptoms improved significantly from baseline and were similar between both treatment groups.ConclusionsAt 10-year follow-up, PCI and MIDCAB in isolated proximal LAD lesions yielded similar long-term outcomes regarding the primary composite clinical endpoint. Target vessel revascularization was more frequent in the PCI group.