brintellex
  • Users Online: 303
  • Print this page
  • Email this page


 
 
Table of Contents
REVIEW ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 58-61

Post CABG myocardial ischemia and infarction – A review


1 Senior Interventional Cardiologist, Apollo Main Hospitals, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
2 Senior Consultant – Cardiology, Formerly Apollo Hospitals, Chennai Presently SIMS Hospital, Vadapalani, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

Date of Submission10-Feb-2020
Date of Decision11-May-2020
Date of Acceptance18-Jun-2020
Date of Web Publication03-May-2021

Correspondence Address:
Dr. I Sathyamurthy
Apollo Main Hospitals, Greams Lane Off Greams Road, Chennai - 600 026, Tamil Nadu
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/JICC.JICC_6_20

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 


Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery is recommended for patients with obstructive coronary artery disease to improve survival and quality of life. Patients receive arterial and venous grafts as conduits to improve coronary circulation. There are factors that can lead to periprocedural myocardial necrosis, and there are factors resulting in late recurrent angina after CABG. In this article, an attempt has been made to review these details.

Keywords: Coronary artery bypass graft, periprocedural myocardial necrosis, late recurrent angina


How to cite this article:
Sathyamurthy I, Jayanthi K. Post CABG myocardial ischemia and infarction – A review. J Indian coll cardiol 2021;11:58-61

How to cite this URL:
Sathyamurthy I, Jayanthi K. Post CABG myocardial ischemia and infarction – A review. J Indian coll cardiol [serial online] 2021 [cited 2021 May 17];11:58-61. Available from: https://www.joicc.org/text.asp?2021/11/2/58/315265




  Introduction Top


As the population is aging, so is the case with prior coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery population. A number of patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACSs) are also on the rise. These patients are older, have multiple comorbidities, and often have impaired renal functions. Increased ischemia time is commonly noticed and door to balloon time of ≤90 min is often not achieved in them.[1] Prior CABG patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are less likely to achieve successful reperfusion with lytic therapy. When they present to the emergency room quite often, graft details are not available, and electrocardiographic changes may not be definitive, often left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is low. Lesion complexity and arterial access difficulties can add to this. ACS in this population can be due to saphenous vein graft (SVG), arterial graft disease, or progression of native coronary artery disease (CAD).


  Early Presentation of Symptoms Postcoronary Artery Bypass Graft Top


Within 30 days after CABG, 10% grafts can be occluded due to endothelial damage during harvesting of the vein or arterial conduits, improper graft lengths either excessive lengths or short conduits causing tenting of coronaries, kinks in the grafts, poor quality of venous conduits, poor quality of distal target arteries, inaccessible intramyocardial course of the target vessels. Post-CABG surgery patients with the reappearance of symptoms soon after surgery are commonly due to incomplete revascularization. Other risk factors for recurrence of symptoms reported were elderly age, male sex, comorbities such as diabetes, systemic hypertension, dyslipidemia, smoking, and obesity. ASCERT study[2] revealed that major determining factors for the reappearance of symptoms were the emergency status of surgery, shock, redo CABG surgery, insulin-dependent diabetes, current smoking, and dialysis dependence. In a study of 3000 patients from 100 high volume US hospitals, venous graft failure (VGF) was noticed in 40%–50%.[3] In PRAGUE – 4 trial,[4] angiographic follow-up revealed 40% of SVG s and 9% of left internal mammary artery (LIMA) grafts were occluded at 1 year.


  Intermediate Presentation Top


1–3 years after CABG surgery pathophysiology includes platelet aggregation, intimal hyperplasia, and decreased fibrinolytic activity.[5] Graft failure rates were reported to be up to 25% during the first 1½ years.[6] In PREVENT IV Trial[7] VGF was noticed in 43% of cases. Quite often, VGF can be silent. In Emory experience[8] of the 34 patients with distal anastomotic stenosis, 25 (74%) presented within 1 year after surgery.


  Late Presentation Top


Usually observed 3 years after CABG and it is due to neoatherosclerosis of native coronaries or grafts. VGF occurs approximately in 1% of grafts per year and gradually raises to 4%–5% per year as years pass.[5] Post-CABG trial[9] showed that late graft stenosis depends on the time interval after surgery, prior myocardial infarction (MI), low LVEF, male sex, current smoking, abnormal lipids, and distal run-off. Surprisingly BARI trial[10] showed that diabetes did not affect SVG patency rates at 4 years. The use of SVG conduits for multiple anastomoses was found to be associated with significantly high rates of VGF at 1 year.[3] Beyond 5 years, degenerated vein grafts exhibit a lot of thrombus burden, low LVEF. Azotemia was found more commonly, and this can be an added risk factor for the outcomes.


  Arterial Grafts Top


Long-term graft patency was noted to be much higher with arterial grafts than vein grafts.[11] Commonly LIMA grafts are used as a conduit for large vessels like a left anterior descending artery or ramus intermedius. Early arterial graft failure occurs due to surgical technique, distal vessel diameter, distal runoff, and anastomosis to a noncritical block in the target vessel. Long-term benefits from single arterial grafts led to the practice of multiple arterial grafts such as bilateral IMAs, radial artery conduits, and gastroepiploic artery leading to the practice of total arterial revascularization.[12] In randomized trials, it was shown that radial artery conduits had much higher angiographic patency rates compared to SVGs.[13],[14]


  Off Pump versus On Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Top


Available literature revealed disadvantages of off-Pump CABG surgery compared to On Pump CABG as regards SVG patency rates; however, no deleterious effect was observed on arterial graft patency.[15] Recently published 5 years outcomes regarding On-pump versus Off-pump CABG surgery revealed that 1104 patients who underwent off-pump CABG when compared to 1099 onpump, STEMI was observed in 12.1% versus 9.6%, respectively (P = 0.05).[16] In the veteran's affairs, randomized on- versus off-pump CABG showed that 23% of SVGs and 11% of IMA grafts failed in the Off-pump group.[17] Presently, many centers are adopting off-pump CABG, and this may result in an increased number of postoperative graft failures.


  Presentation Top


Prior CABG patients can present with chronic stable angina or ACS.

Acute coronary syndromes

Three percent of cases with prior CABG develop STEMI per year. STEMI was classified as type 5 MI as per universal definition.[18] Welsh et al.[19] reported an incidence of STEMI in 2%–14% of cases with prior CABG surgery, and these were associated with the worst outcomes.[20],[21],[22],[23],[24] National Cardiovascular Registry Data showed that, of the 15,628 patients who have undergone primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), only 6% had prior CABG surgery.[25] In PAMI – 2 trial[26] of 1100 patients with prior CABG surgery, only 5.3% had STEMI. In the National Registry of MI – 2[27] observational database of 45,925 STEMI patients, 6351 were treated with primary PCI, of which 375 (5.9%) had a history of prior CABG. This shows that STEMI is less common in post-CABG subset.

Lytic therapy

In most of the primary PCI trials, patients with prior CABG were excluded, and no concrete guidelines were available. The line of therapy has to be decided on an individual basis depending upon the graft status, renal parameters, LV function, etc., Lytic therapy has shown poor success rates in this subset of patients.[1],[28] When the presentation of ACS was very late after CABG surgery, the reperfusion rates were low due to diffusely diseased venous grafts with thrombus burden with less number of patients achieving TIMI III flow.[1] Rafid et al.[29] showed that reperfusion rates after lytic therapy were much lower in those with prior CABG compared to those without (8.8% vs. 29.2%, P = 0.001).

Percutaneous coronary interventions in postcoronary artery bypass graft acute coronary syndromes

When SVG was the culprit vessel, primary PCI results were inferior to those of native vessels. Brodie et al.[30] showed in 2240 consecutive patients with post-CABG STEMI, those who underwent PCI to SVG were sicker with poor LV function, and most of them had three-vessel CAD, compared to those who underwent native vessel PCI. Patients with SVG interventions had lower rates of TIMI grades, higher in-hospital mortality, and worse 10 years survival, and angiographic SVG patency rate was only 64% at 1 year. Similar outcomes were reported by others.[31],[32],[33] Primary PCI is currently a Class I indication if it can be done in a timely manner.[18],[34],[35] During PCI in the early postoperative period, caution should be exercised to prevent suture line perforations by the guide wires. Sometimes, it may not be possible to identify the culprit's vessel.

Saphenous vein graft interventions

The progression of disease in SVG s is much rapid,[36] and stenting has got better long-term outcomes than medical treatment.[37],[38] Primary PCI in SVG's carries higher mortality and poor long-term outcomes.[25],[39],[40] If feasible native vessel intervention is always preferable, even in CTOs, as many centers are routinely performing them. Beyond 3 years CABG, there is usually a large thrombus burden and risk of distal embolization with poor long-term outcomes. There are no reports on added benefits of fractional flow reserve in SVGs.

Internal mammary artery graft interventions

When symptoms occur within 1 year, it is usually due to surgical technique, and the stenosis is usually at the distal anastomotic site. Shaft lesions are rare and occur very late after surgery. In one study of 174 LIMA interventions, 63% were at the distal anastomotic site, and the procedural success was 97% with target vessel revascularization of 7% at 1 year.[41] Complications like spasm, dissection have been reported. There are no large scale studies and long-term outcome data available regarding IMA graft PCI.

Grafts versus native coronary percutaneous coronary intervention

In APEX AMI TRIAL,[18] of the 128 patients with prior CABG surgery, in63 (41%) SVG was the culprit vessel. After PCI, 90 days mortality was 19%, which was significantly higher compared to native vessel PCI. Gaglia et al.[33] in their series of 192 patients, 30-day mortality was 14.3% for SVG interventions compared to 8.4% for native vessel PCI. Kohl et al.[39] had 249 patients of ACS among 3542 who had prior CABG surgery. Culprit vessel was SVG in 34%, the native vessel was 42%, and no culprit could be identified in 24% of cases. This confirms that native vessel PCI is always preferable to SVGs wherever possible.

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus redo coronary artery bypass graft surgery

In Emory University Series[42] during 14 years, 2613 patients underwent PCI and 1561 undergone redo CABG surgery. PCI showed better results as regards to mortality, the occurrence of stroke, cost of the procedure, and average length of stay. Ten-year survival was better in the PCI group compared to redo CABG patients, and survival curves were observed to be better in native vessel PCI compared to SVG's. However, these observations were not confirmed by the Mayo clinic study.[43] In Cleveland clinic series,[44] 1497 patients with prior CABG have undergone reoperation, and 704 underwent PCI. When complete revascularization was achieved, initial outcomes were favorable for PCI as regards 30 days mortality, periprocedural Q-wave infarcts, and strokes, but at 5 years redo CABG surgery showed better survival. The only randomized trial by Morrison et al.[45] compared PCI (67 patients) with redo CABG (75 patients) in prior CABG cases and concluded that there was no advantage of one procedure over the other, and it should be decided on a case to case basis.


  Conclusions Top


ACS patients with prior CABG are a high-risk population. The presentation as STEMI is uncommon. Response to lytic therapy is poor, and door to balloon times of ≤90 min is rarely achieved. It is always preferable to consider native coronary PCI wherever possible. Poor long-term outcomes noted in SVG interventions. As the CABG population is increasing, the number of PCIs in this subset is also on the rise, and one must be geared to combat this challenge.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Grines CL, Booth DC, Nissen SE, Gurley JC, Bennett KA, O'Connor WN, et al. Mechanism of acute myocardial infarction in patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting and therapeutic implications. Am J Cardiol 1990;65:1292-6.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Shahian DM, O'Brien SM, Sheng S, Grover FL, Mayer JE, Jacobs JP, et al. Predictors of long-term survival after coronary artery bypass grafting surgery: Results from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (the ASCERT study). Circulation 2012;125:1491-500.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Mehta RH, Ferguson TB, Lopes RD, Hafley GE, Mack MJ, Kouchoukos NT, et al. Saphenous vein grafts with multiple versus single distal targets in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery: One-year graft failure and five-year outcomes from the Project of Ex-Vivo Vein Graft Engineering via Transfection (PREVENT) IV trial. Circulation 2011;124:280-8.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Widimsky P, Straka Z, Stros P, Jirasek K, Dvorak J, Votava J, et al. One-year coronary bypass graft patency: A randomized comparison between off-pump and on-pump surgery angiographic results of the PRAGUE-4 trial. Circulation 2004;110:3418-23.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Motwani JG, Topol EJ. Aortocoronary saphenous vein graft disease: Pathogenesis, predisposition, and prevention. Circulation 1998;97:916-31.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Fitzgibbon GM, Kafka HP, Leach AJ, Keon WJ, Hooper GD, Burton JR. Coronary bypass graft fate and patient outcome: Angiographic follow-up of 5,065 grafts related to survival and reoperation in 1,388 patients during 25 years. J Am Coll Cardiol 1996;28:616-26.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Hess CN, Lopes RD, Gibson CM, Hager R, Wojdyla DM, Englum BR, et al. Saphenous vein graft failure after coronary artery bypass surgery: Insights from PREVENT IV. Circulation 2014;130:1445-51.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Douglas JS Jr., Gruentzig AR, King SB 3rd, Hollman J, Ischinger T, Meier B, et al. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in patients with prior coronary bypass surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 1983;2:745-54.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Domanski MJ, Borkowf CB, Campeau L, Knatterud GL, White C, Hoogwerf B, et al. Prognostic factors for atherosclerosis progression in saphenous vein grafts: The postcoronary artery bypass graft (Post-CABG) trial. Post-CABG Trial Investigators. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36:1877-83.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Schwartz L, Kip KE, Frye RL, Alderman EL, Schaff HV, Detre KM, et al. Coronary bypass graft patency in patients with diabetes in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). Circulation 2002;106:2652-8.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Loop FD, Lytle BW, Cosgrove DM, Stewart RW, Goormastic M, Williams GW, et al. Influence of the internal-mammary-artery graft on 10-year survival and other cardiac events. N Engl J Med 1986;314:1-6.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Baskett RJ, Cafferty FH, Powell SJ, Kinsman R, Keogh BE, Nashef SA. Total arterial revascularization is safe: Multicenter ten-year analysis of 71,470 coronary procedures. Ann Thorac Surg 2006;81:1243-8.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Desai ND, Cohen EA, Naylor CD, Fremes SE; Radial Artery Patency Study Investigators. A randomized comparison of radial-artery and saphenous-vein coronary bypass grafts. N Engl J Med 2004;351:2302-9.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Collins P, Webb CM, Chong CF, Moat NE; Radial Artery Versus Saphenous Vein Patency (RSVP) Trial Investigators. Radial artery versus saphenous vein patency randomized trial: Five-year angiographic follow-up. Circulation 2008;117:2859-64.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Zhang B, Zhou J, Li H, Liu Z, Chen A, Zhao Q. Comparison of graft patency between off-pump and on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: An updated meta-analysis. Ann Thorac Surg 2014;97:1335-41.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Shroyer AL, Hattler B, Wagner TH, Collins JF, Baltz JH, Quin JA, et al. Five-Year Outcomes after On-Pump and Off-Pump Coronary-Artery Bypass. N Engl J Med 2017;377:623-32.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Shroyer AL, Grover FL, Hattler B, Collins JF, McDonald GO, Kozora E, et al. On-pump versus off-pump coronary-artery bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1827-37.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, Simoons ML, Chaitman BR, White HD, et al. Third universal definition of myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60:1581-98.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Welsh RC, Granger CB, Westerhout CM, Blankenship JC, Holmes DR Jr., O'Neill WW, et al. Prior coronary artery bypass graft patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2010;3:343-51.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Mathew V, Gersh B, Barron H, Every N, Tiefenbrunn A, Frederick P, et al. Inhospital outcome of acute myocardial infarction in patients with prior coronary artery bypass surgery. Am Heart J 2002;144:463-9.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Bench TJ, Parikh PB, Jeremias A, Brener SJ, Naidu SS, Shlofmitz RA, et al. The impact of previous revascularization on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. J Invasive Cardiol 2013;25:166-9.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Lee KL, Woodlief LH, Topol EJ, Weaver WD, Betriu A, Col J, et al. Predictors of 30-day mortality in the era of reperfusion for acute myocardial infarction. Results from an international trial of 41,021 patients. GUSTO-I Investigators. Circulation 1995;91:1659-68.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Berry C, Pieper KS, White HD, Solomon SD, van de Werf F, Velazquez EJ, et al. Patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting have a poor outcome after myocardial infarction: An analysis of the VALsartan in acute myocardial iNfarcTion trial (VALIANT). Eur Heart J 2009;30:1450-6.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Dittrich HC, Gilpin E, Nicod P, Henning H, Cali G, Ricou F, et al. Outcome after acute myocardial infarction in patients with prior coronary artery bypass surgery. Am J Cardiol 1993;72:507-13.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Gruberg L, Hellkamp AS, Thomas LE, de Lemos JA, Scirica BM, Hilliard A, et al. The Association of Previous Revascularization With In-Hospital Outcomes in Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients: Results From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2015;8:1954-62.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Stone GW, Brodie BR, Griffin JJ, Grines L, Boura J, O'Neill WW, et al. Clinical and angiographic outcomes in patients with previous coronary artery bypass graft surgery treated with primary balloon angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction. Second Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction Trial (PAMI-2) Investigators. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;35:605-11.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Peterson LR, Chandra NC, French WJ, Rogers WJ, Weaver WD, Tiefenbrunn AJ. Reperfusion therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction and prior coronary artery bypass surgery (national registry of myocardial infarction – 2). Am J Cardiol 1999;84:1287-91.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Labinaz M, Sketch MH Jr., Ellis SG, Abramowitz BM, Stebbins AL, Pieper KS, et al. Outcome of acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in patients with prior coronary artery bypass surgery receiving thrombolytic therapy. Am Heart J 2001;141:469-77.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Al-Aqeedi RF, Al Suwaidi J. Outcomes of patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft who present with acute coronary syndrome. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther 2014;12:715-32.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Brodie BR, VerSteeg DS, Brodie MM, Hansen C, Richter SJ, Stuckey TD, et al. Poor long-term patient and graft survival after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction due to saphenous vein graft occlusion. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2005;65:504-9.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Hoffmann R, Nitendo G, Deserno V, Adamu U, Almalla M, Blindt R, et al. Follow-up results after interventional treatment of infarct-related saphenous vein graft occlusion. Coron Artery Dis 2010;21:61-4.  Back to cited text no. 31
    
32.
Al Suwaidi J, Velianou JL, Berger PB, Mathew V, Garratt KN, Reeder GS, et al. Primary percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with acute myocardial infarction and prior coronary artery bypass grafting. Am Heart J 2001;142:452-9.  Back to cited text no. 32
    
33.
Gaglia MA Jr., Torguson R, Xue Z, Gonzalez MA, Ben-Dor I, Suddath WO, et al. Outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction from a saphenous vein graft culprit undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2011;78:23-9.  Back to cited text no. 33
    
34.
O'Gara PT, Kushner FG, Ascheim DD, Casey DE Jr, Chung MK, de Lemos JA, et al. 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction: A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2013;127:e362-425.  Back to cited text no. 34
    
35.
Zijlstra F, Hoorntje JC, de Boer MJ, Reiffers S, Miedema K, Ottervanger JP, et al. Long-term benefit of primary angioplasty as compared with thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1999;341:1413-9.  Back to cited text no. 35
    
36.
Ellis SG, Brener SJ, De Luca S, Tuzcu EM, Raymond RE, Whitlow PL, et al. Late myocardial ischemic events after saphenous vein graft intervention: Importance of initially “non-significant “ vein graft lesions. Am J Cardiol 1997;79:1460-4.  Back to cited text no. 36
    
37.
Rodés-Cabau J, Bertrand OF, Larose E, Déry JP, Rinfret S, Bagur R, et al. Comparison of plaque sealing with paclitaxel-eluting stents versus medical therapy for the treatment of moderate nonsignificant saphenous vein graft lesions: The moderate vein graft lesion stenting with the taxus stent and intravascular ultrasound (VELETI) pilot trial. Circulation 2009;120:1978-86.  Back to cited text no. 37
    
38.
Rodés-Cabau J. Plaque Scaling with Paclitaxel – Eluting Stents for the Treatment of Moderate non-Significant Saphenous Vein Graft Lesions. Three Year Follow up of the VALETI (Moderate Vein Graft Lesion Stenting with the Taxus Stent and Intravascular Ultrasound) Trial. Atlanta GA: Presented at i2 Summit; 14 March, 2010.  Back to cited text no. 38
    
39.
Kohl LP, Garberich RF, Yang H, Sharkey SW, Burke MN, Lips DL, et al. Outcomes of primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with previous coronary bypass surgery. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2014;7:981-7.  Back to cited text no. 39
    
40.
Nguyen TT, O'Neill WW, Grines CL, Stone GW, Brodie BR, Cox DA, et al. One-year survival in patients with acute myocardial infarction and a saphenous vein graft culprit treated with primary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol 2003;91:1250-4.  Back to cited text no. 40
    
41.
Gruberg L, Dangas G, Mehran R, Hong MK, Waksman R, Mintz GS, et al. Percutaneous revascularization of the internal mammary artery graft: Short and long term outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;35:944-8.  Back to cited text no. 41
    
42.
Weintraub WS, Jones EL, Morris DC, King SB 3rd, Guyton RA, Craver JM. Outcome of reoperative coronary bypass surgery versus coronary angioplasty after previous bypass surgery. Circulation 1997;95:868-77.  Back to cited text no. 42
    
43.
Mathew V, Clavell AL, Lennon RJ, Grill DE, Holmes DR Jr. Percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with prior coronary artery bypass surgery: Changes in patient characteristics and outcome during two decades. Am J Med 2000;108:127-35.  Back to cited text no. 43
    
44.
Brener SJ, Lytle BW, Casserly IP, Ellis SG, Topol EJ, Lauer MS. Predictors of revascularization method and long-term outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention or repeat coronary bypass surgery in patients with multivessel coronary disease and previous coronary bypass surgery. Eur Heart J 2006;27:413-8.  Back to cited text no. 44
    
45.
Morrison DA, Sethi G, Sacks J, Henderson WG, Grover F, Sedlis S, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus repeat bypass surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia: AWESOME randomized trial and registry experience with post-CABG patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;40:1951-4.  Back to cited text no. 45
    




 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Early Presentati...
Intermediate Pre...
Late Presentation
Arterial Grafts
Off Pump versus ...
Presentation
Conclusions
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed50    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded7    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal