Aldama PLI, Obregón SÁG, Hernández NM, Aroche AR, García HRA, Martínez MJO, Cuba RAL

Language: Spanish
References: 16
Page:
PDF size: 159.09 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction. The treatment of choice for multivessel coronary disease in diabetic patients is the myocardial revascularization surgery. A group of patient present comorbilities that condition a high surgical risk. To determinate the evolution of diabetic patients with multivessel coronary disease treated by percutaneous intervention. Methods: a longitudinal, prospective and descriptive, study was developed in 40 patients with multivessel coronary disease, and high surgical risk, revascularized by percutaneous intervention with a follow-up period of two years. Results: The average age of the patients studied due to 73, 1 ± 7, 2 years, predominantly female (65 %). The most prevalent cardiovascular risk were hipertension (70 %) and dyslipidemia (52,5%). Complete revascularization was posible in 85% of all. The overall mortality was 7, 5 % and was need a necessity of a new revascularization in 25 %. The incidence of non-fatal infarction and restenosis of stent were 15% and 20 %. In two years of follow-up survival free of adverse cardiovascular events was 75%. Conclusions. In diabetic patients with multivessel coronary disease and high surgical risk, percutaneous intervention can be considered a therapeutic alternative.

REFERENCES

1. Organización Mundial de la Salud [Internet]. Ginebra, Suiza: OMS; c2018 [citado 20 de marzo 2019]. Enfermedades cardiovasculares, datos y cifras; [aprox. 17 pantallas]. Disponible en: https://www.who.int/es/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/cardiovascular-diseases- (cvds).

2. Luscher TF, Creager MA, Beckman JA, Cosentino F. Diabetes and vascular disease: Pathophysiology, clinical consequences, and medical therapy: Part II. Circulation. 2003; 108:1655–1661.

3. Rana JS, Venkitachalam L, Selzer F, Mulukutla SR, Marroquin OC, Laskey WK. Evolution of percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes: a report from the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute-sponsored PTCA (1985–1986) and Dynamic (1997–2006) Registries. Diabetes Care. 2010; 33:1976–1982.

4. Ramanathan K, Abel JG, Park JE, Fung A, Mathew V, Taylor CM. Surgical versus percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with diabetes and acute coronary syndromes. J Am CollCardiol. 2017; 70:2995–3006.

5. Jönsson A, Hammar N, Nordquist T, Ivert T. Left main coronary artery stenosis no longer a risk factor for early and late death after coronary artery bypass surgery an experience covering three decades. Eur J CardiothoracSurg 2006; 30:311-7.

6. Henderson RA, Pocock SJ, Clayton TC, Knight R, Fox KAA, Julian DG. Seven year outcome in the RITA 2 trial: coronary angioplasty versus medical therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol. [Internet]. 2003 Oct 1 [citado 20 de abril del 2019]; 42(7):1161-70. Disponible en: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0735109703009513?v

7. The Final 10 Year Follow Up Results from the BARI Randomized Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. [Internet]. 2007 Apr 17 [citado 10 de septiembre del 2018]; 49(15):1600-1606. Disponible en: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0735707004329?via%

8. Head SJ, Davierwala PM, Serruys PW, Redwood SR, Colombo A, Mack MJ, et al. Coronary artery bypass grafting vs. percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with three-vessel disease: final five-year follow-up of the SYNTAX trial. European Heart Journal [Internet]. 2 de octubre de 2014 [citado 22 de enero de 2019]; 35(40):2821-30. Disponible en: https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/eurheartj/ehu213

9. Dangas GD, Farkouh ME, Sleeper LA, Yang M, Schoos MM; FREEDOM Investigators. Long term outcome of PCI versus CABG in insulin and non insulin treated diabetic patients: Results from the FREEDOM trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. [Internet]. 2014 Sep 23 [citado 27 de marzo del 2019]; 64(12):1189-97.Disponible en: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0735109714045422

10. Nashef SA, Roques F, Michel P, Gauducheau E, Lemeshow S, Salamon R. European system for cardiac operative risk evaluation (EuroSCORE). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 1999; 16:9-13.

11. Bangalore S, Guo Y, Samadashvili Z, Blecker S, Xu J.Everolimus eluting stents or bypass surgery for multivessel coronary disease. N Engl J Med. [Internet]. 2015 Mar 26 [citado 27 de marzo del 2019]; 372:1213–1222. Disponible en: https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa1412168?articleTools

12. Zimarino M, Ricci F, Romanello M, et al. Complete myocardial revascularization confers a larger clinical benefit when performed with state-of-the-art techniques in high-risk patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of randomized and observational studies. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2016; 87:3-12

13. Kamalesh M, Sharp TG, Tang XC, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass surgery in United States veterans with diabetes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 61:808-16.

14. Naito R, Miyauchi K, Konishi H, Tsuboi S, Ogita M, Dohi T, et al. Comparación de la mortalidad entre el injerto de revascularización coronaria y la intervención coronaria percutánea con stents liberadores de fármacos en ancianos con diabetes y enfermedad coronaria multivaso Heart and Vessels 2016; 31(9): 1424 – 1429. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00380-015-0746-1

15. Spadaccio C, Benedetto U. Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in thetreatment of multivessel coronary disease: quo vadis? a review of the evidences on coronary artery disease Ann Cardio thorac Surg 2018;7(4):506-515.

16. Lim JY, Deo SV, Kim WS, et al. Drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting in diabetic patients with multi-vessel disease: a meta-analysis. Heart Lung Circ 2014; 23:717-25.