Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are associated with comparable long-term mortality rates among patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD), according to new data published in the American Journal of Cardiology.[1] However, HCR patients were more likely to experience certain adverse events.

HCR, as the name suggests, is a combination of two different revascularization techniques. It includes both minimally invasive for the left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery and traditional percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non-LAD lesions.

Previous studies showed the short-term benefits of HCR, including comparable mortality, reduced lengths of intubation and hospital stay, and less transfusion than CABG, wrote first author Junichi Shimamura, MD, with the division of cardiothoracic surgery at Westchester Medical Center in New York, and colleagues. However, the current guidelines do not recommend HCR as a routine procedure. This is partly because the previous analyses were based on retrospective data, and there is a lack of randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses in a large population with a long-term outcome.

Shimamura et al. tracked data from 13 different studies comparing the two techniques. The mean patient age was 64.3 years old, and the mean follow-up period was 5.1 years.

Read more:

Hybrid coronary revascularization vs. CABG for multivessel CAD: New meta-analysis tracks long-term outcomes - Cardiovascular Business