Angioplasty is safe alternative to bypass surgery: study

Afp
Monday 04 April 2011 19:00 EDT
Comments
(dan ionut popescu)

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

People who suffer from serious heart disease could benefit similarly from balloon angioplasty as from major open heart surgery, said a study released by South Korean researchers on Monday.

Bypass surgery, in which vessels are taken from elsewhere in a patient's body and sewn onto the heart to replace clogged ones, is the most common method of treating people with left main coronary artery disease.

But the results of the randomized clinical trial of 600 patients who received either angioplasty or bypass surgery showed similar survival rates and about the same number of major adverse events like heart attack and stroke after one year.

Doctors have long debated which method is best for treating the narrowing of the arteries that is the major cause of heart attacks. Angioplasty is less invasive but can require more repeat procedures if the artery restricts again over time.

"In spite of higher revascularization after angioplasty, it can be a potential alternative if the two treatments have a similar risk of hard endpoints, such as heart attack, death or stroke," said Seung-Jung Park, lead study author.

"At the time this study was initiated, there was great enthusiasm about the outcomes of angioplasty, and as a result, off-label use rapidly spread without enough evidence. Therefore, initiation of a randomized study was urgent."

The PRECOMBAT trial's findings were presented at the American College of Cardiology conference in New Orleans. The study is also being simultaneously published in the New England Journal of Medicine.

The randomized study used a primary outcome measure combining four factors to measure safety and efficacy: death from any cause, heart attack, stroke, and ischemia-driven TVR (target vessel revascularization), or the need for more treatment after renarrowing.

Death, heart attack and stroke rates were similar among the two groups.

Nine percent of patients in the angioplasty group experienced ischemia-driven TVR after two years, compared to 4.2 percent in the bypass group.

"The incidences of death, heart attack and stroke - which are indicators of safety and have a significant impact on mortality - were comparable," said Park.

"Although angioplasty did have a higher risk of TVR, this efficacy endpoint does not have a direct association with mortality and thus has a less significant implication than the safety outcomes," he added.

"Therefore we can conclude that angioplasty can be a feasible alternative to CABG (coronary artery bypass)."

ksh/sg

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in