Generate QR code
Open Access
Subscription Access
Тhe choice of surgical treatment for patients with stable angina pectoris
https://doi.org/10.30629/0023-2149-2025-103-5-339-345
Abstract
The article presents generalized literature data on the relevance of the problem of myocardial revascularization in patients with angina pectoris. Various methods of surgical treatment of this pathology that currently exist are described, their positive and negative sides are clarified. The effectiveness of open surgical and endovascular interventions in patients with chronic coronary syndrome was compared. It is indicated that the most promising method of treating multivessel lesions in hig-hrisk patients is a hybrid intervention combining the advantages of open and endovascular interventions. The hemodynamic significance of borderline stenosis should be determined by evaluating the functional reserve of coronary blood flow. The peculiarities of choosing one or another method of revascularization based on the generally accepted scale of coronary artery lesion Suntax Score are emphasized. The disadvantages of the existing criteria are indicated and justified
About the Authors
B. S. Sukovatykh
Kursk State Medical University of the Ministry of Healthcare of the Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Boris S. Sukovatykh – Doctor of Medical Sciences, Professor, Head of the Department of General Surgery
Kursk
N. V. Bolomatov
City Clinical Hospital of Emergency Medical Care
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Nikolay V. Bolomatov – Doctor of Medical Sciences, Professor, Head of the Department of X-ray Surgical Methods of Diagnosis and Treatment
Kursk
A. V. Sereditsky
Orel State University named after I.S. Turgenev, Medical Institute
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Alexey V. Sereditsky – Candidate of Medical Sciences, Head of the Department of X-ray Surgical Methods of Diagnosis and Treatment
Orel
D. V. Sidorov
City Clinical Hospital of Emergency Medical Care; Orel region Regional Clinical Hospital; Orel State University named after I.S. Turgenev, Medical Institute
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dmitry V. Sidorov – Candidate of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of General Surgery; doctor of the Department of X-ray Surgical Methods of Diagnosis and Treatment
Kursk;
Orel
M. B. Sukovatykh
Kursk State Medical University of the Ministry of Healthcare of the Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Mikhail B. Sukovatykh – Candidate of Medical Sciences, Associate Professor of the Department of General Surgery
Kursk
References
1. Hillis L.D., Smith P.K., Anderson J.L., Bittl J.A., Bridges C.R. et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA Guideline for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: a report of theAmerican College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2011;124:652–735.
2. Chazova I.E.,Oshchepkova E.V. The fight against cardiovascular diseases and ways to solve them at the present stage. Bulletin of Roszdravnadzor. 2015;5:7–10. (In Russian).
3. Boitsov S.A., Zairatians O.V., Andreev E.N., Smorodskaya I.V. Comparison of mortality rates from coronary heart disease among men and women over 50 years of age in Russia and the USA. Russian Journal of Cardiology. 2017;146(6):100–107. (In Russian).
4. Knuuti J., Wijns W., Saraste A., Capodanno D., Barbato E., Funck-Brentano C. et al. 2019 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of chronic coronary syndromes. Eur. Heart J. 2020;41:407–77. (In Russian). DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz425
5. Alexander J.H., Smith P.K. Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting. N. Engl J. Med. 2016;374:1954–1964.
6. Benetti F.J., Naselli G., Wood M., and Geffner L. Direct myocardial revascularization without extracorporeal circulation; Experience in 700 patients. Chest. 1991;100(2):312–316.
7. Buffalo E., de Andrade J.C.S., Branco J.N.R., Teles L.A., Aguiar L.F., Gomes W.G. Coronary artery bypass grafting without car dio-pulmonary bypass. Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 1996;61(1):63–66.
8. Yadava O.P., Prakash A., KunduA., Yadava M. Coronary artery bypass grafting in women–is OPCAB mandatory? Indian Heart Journal. 2011;63(5):425–428.
9. Afilalo J., Rasti M., Ohayon S.M., Shimony A., Eisenberg M.J. Off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery: an updated metaanalysis and meta-regression of randomized trials. European Heart Journal. 2012;33(10):1257–1267.
10. Shroyer A.L., Grover F.L., Hattler B. et al. On-pump versus off-pump coronary-artery bypass surgery. N. Engl J. Med. 2009;361(19):1827–1837.
11. Bokeria L.A., Gordeem M.L., Avaliani V.M. Coronary artery bypass grafting on a working heart: a modern view of the problem. Thoracic and cardiovascular surgery. 2013;4:4–15. (In Russian).
12. Akchurin R.S., Shiryaev A.A., Vasiliev V.P., Galyat dinov D.M., Vlasov E.E. Modern trends in coronary sur-gery. Pathology of blood circulation and coronary surgery. 2017;21(3)634–44. (In Russian).
13. Kulichenkova Yu.S., Kirkina N.Yu. Use of percutaneous coronary in the treatment st elevation myocardial infarction. Clinical medicine and pharmacology. 2020:6(1):48–52. (In Russian).
14. Khorolets E.V., Shlyk S.V. Possibilities of reperfusion therapy for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Consilium Medicum. 2020;22(5):87–91. (In Russian).
15. Bessonov I.S., Kuznetsov V.A., Dyakova A.O. et. al. Percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with st-elevation myocardial infarction: 10-years follow-up. Caridology. 2020;60(6):69–75. (In Russian).
16. Skrypnik Dmitriy V., Manchurov Vladimir N., Anisimov Kirill V. et. al. Successful thrombectomy from coronary and cerebral vessels in a patient with embolic acute myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. Russian journal of Endovascular surgery. 2018.5(4):461–467. (In Russian). DOI: 10.24183/2409-4080-2018-5-4-461-467
17. Manchurov Vladimir N., Anisimov Kirill V., Oskanov M.B. Mmyocardial infarction due to coronary artery embolism et. al. Kardiologiia. 2018;58(2):83–90. (In Russian). DOI: 10.18087/cardio.2018.2.10090
18. Head S.J., Milojevic M., Daemen J., Ahn J.M., Boersma E., Christiansen E.H. et al. Mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting for coronary artery disease: a pooled analysis of individual patient data. Lancet. 2018;391:939–48. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30423-9
19. Klein L.W., Krone R.J. Angiographic characterization of lesion morphology. Cardiac Interventions Today. 2008;3:44–49.
20. Giacoppo D., Colleran R., Cassese S., Frangieh A.H., Wiebe J., Joner M. et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention vs coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with left main coronary artery stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Cardiol. 2017;2:1079–88. DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2017.2895
21. Myler R.K., Shaw R.E., Stertzer S.H., Hecht H.S., Ryan C., Rosen-blum J., Cumberland D.C., Murphy M.C., Hansell H.N., Hidalgo B. Lesion morphology and coronary angioplasty: Current experience and analysis. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 1992;19:1641–1652. DOI: 10.1016/07351097(92)90631v
22. Appelman Y.E., Piek J., Strikwerda S., Tijssen J.G.P., Feyter P.J., David G.K., Serruys P.W., Margolis J.R., Koelemay M.J., van Swijndregt MEWJ., Koolen J.J. Randomised trial of excimer laser angioplasty versus balloon angioplasty for treatment of obstructive coronary artery disease. Lancet. 1996;347:79–84. DOI: 10.1016/s01406736(96)902093
23. Calafiore A.M., Prapas S., Osman A., Di Mauro M. Coronary artery bypass grafting off-pump or on-pump: another brick in the wall. Ann. Transl. Med. 2017;5(7):168–173. DOI: 10.21037/atm.2017.03.52
24. Andreis A., Imazio M., Piroli F., Avondo S., Casula M., Paneva E. et al. Efficacy and safety of colchicine for the prevention of major cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis on 12 869 patients. Eur. J. Prev. Cardiol. 2022;28:1916–25. DOI: 10.1093/eurjpc/zwab045
25. Sabatine M.S., Bergmark B.A., Murphy S.A., O’Gara P.T., Smith P.K., Serruys P.W. et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting in left main coronary artery disease: an individual patient data meta-analysis. Lancet. 2021;398:2247–57. DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(21)02334-5
26. Doenst T., Bonow RO., Bhatt DL., Falk V., Gaudino M. Improving terminology to describe coronary artery procedures: JACC review topic of the week. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2021;78:180. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.05.010
27. Patel N.C., Hemli J.M., Seetharam K., Singh V.P., Scheinerman S.J., Pirelli L. et al. Minimally invasive coronary bypass versus percuta-neous coronary intervention for isolated complex stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2022;163:1839–46.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2020.04.171
28. Gaudino M., Andreotti F., Kimura T. Current concepts in coronary artery revascularisation. Lancet. 2023;401:1611–28. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(23)00459-2
29. Ermakov D.Y. Invasive methods for detecting myocardial ischemia in endovascular surgery. Bulletin of the National Medical and Surgical Center named after N.I. Pirogov. 2020;15(2):114–119. (In Russian). DOI: 10.25881/BPNMSC.2020.83.29.020
30. Jerabek S, Kovarnik T. Technical aspects and limitations of fractional flow reserve measurement. Acta Cardiologica. 2019;74(1):9–16. DOI: 10.1080/00015385.2018.1444951
31. Jeremias A., Kirtane A.J., Stone G.W. A test in context: fractional flow reserve: accuracy, prognostic implications, and limitations. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2017;69(22):2748–2758. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.04.019
32. Megaly M., Khalil C., Saad M. et al. Outcomes with deferred versus performed revascularization of coronary lesions with gray-zone fractional flow reserve values. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2019;12(12):e008315. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS
33. Abo-Aly M., Lolay G., Adams C. et al. Comparison of intracoronary versus intravenous adenosine induced maximal hyperemia for fractional flow reserve measurement: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 2019;94(5):714–721. DOI: 10.1002/ccd.28317
34. Darenskii D.I., Gramovich V.V., Zharova E.A. et al. Comparison of diagnostic values of instantaneous wave-free ratio and fractional flow reserve with noninvasive methods for evaluating myocardial ischemia in assessment of the functional significance of intermediate coronary stenoses in patients with chronic ischemic heart disease. Kardiologiia. 2017;57(8):11–19. (In Russian). DOI:10.18087/cardio.2017.8.10012.
35. Darenskii D.I., Gramovich V.V., Zharova E.A. et al. Optimal cut-off points of instantaneous wave-free ratio in the assessment of the functional significance of coronary artery stenoses using noninvasive methods as reference. Evraziiskii kardiologicheskii zhurnal. 2016;4:34–41. (In Russian).
36. Berry C., McClure J.D., Olroyd K.G. Meta-analysis of death and myocardial infarction in the DEFINE-FLAIR and iFR-SWEDE-HEART trials. Circulation. 2017;136(24):2389–2391. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.030430
37. Lowenstern A., Wu J., Bradley S.M., Fanaroff A.C., Tcheng J.E., Wang T.Y. Current landscape of hybrid revascularization: a report from the NCDR CathPCI Registry. Am. Heart J. 2019;215:167–77. DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2019.06.014
38. Ganyukov V.I., Kochergin N.A., Shilov A.A., Tarasov R.S., Skupien J., Kozyrin KA. et al. Randomized clinical trial of surgical versus percutaneous versus hybrid multivessel coronary revascularization: 3 years’ follow-up. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 2021;14:1163–5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.02.037
39. Byrne R.A., Fremes S., Capodanno D., Czerny M., Doenst T., Emberson J.R. et al. 2022 Joint ESC/EACTS review of the 2018 guideline recommendations on the revascularization of left main coronaryartery disease in patients at low surgical risk and anatomy suitable for PCI or CABG. Eur. Heart J. 2023;44:4310–20. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehad476
40. Grigoriev V.S., Petrosyan K.V., Abrosi mov A.V. Anatomical risk assessment scale SYNTAX Score is a tool for determining the severity of coronary artery disease and pre dicting the outcomes of endovascular interventions. Creative cardiology. 2019;13(2):159–172. (In Russian). DOI: 10.24022/1997-3187-2019-13-2-159-172
41. Bonaros N., Van Craenenbroeck E. A good operation is not enough, when it comes to frail patients. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2023;64:ezad205. DOI: 10.1093/ejcts/ezad205
42. Calburean P.A., Grebenisan P., Nistor I.A., Pal K., Vacariu V., Drincal R.K. et al. Prediction of 3-year all-cause and cardiovascular cause mortality in a prospective percutaneous coronary intervention registry: machine learning model outperforms conventional clinical risk scores. Atherosclerosis. 2022;350:33–40. DOI: 10.1016/j.atheroscle-rosis.2022.03.028
43. Hara H., Shiomi H., van Klaveren D., Kent D.M., Steyerberg E.W., Garg S., et al. External validation of the SYNTAX score II 2020. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2021;78:1227–38. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.07.027
44. Lawton J., Tamis-Holland J. et al. 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guide-line for Coronary Artery Revascularization. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2022;79(I2):21–129.
45. Thuijs D.J.F.M., Kappetein A.P., Serruys P.W. et. al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial. Lancet. 2020;394(10206):1325–1334.
46. Takahashi K., Serruys P. W., Fuster V. et al. Redevelopment and validation of the SYNTAX score II to individualise decision making between percutaneous and surgical revascularisation in patients with complex coronary artery disease: secondary analysis of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAXES trial with external cohort validation. Lancet. 2020;396:1399–1412.
47. Alekyan B.G., Karapetyan N.G., Kravchenko V.V. et al. The role of the SYNTAX Score II scale in decision-making by the "heart team" on the method of treatment of patients with complex lesions of the coronary arteries. Literature review. Cardiological Bulletin. 2019;14(3):17–25. (In Russian).
48. Escaned J., Collet C., Ryan N., Luigi De Maria G., Walsh S., Sabate M., et al. Clinical outcomes of state-of-the-art percutaneous cor- onary revascularization in patients with de novo three vessel disease: 1-year results of the SYNTAX II study. Eur. Heart J. 2017;38:3124–34. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx512
49.
Review
For citations:
Sukovatykh B.S., Bolomatov N.V., Sereditsky A.V., Sidorov D.V., Sukovatykh M.B. Тhe choice of surgical treatment for patients with stable angina pectoris. Clinical Medicine (Russian Journal). 2025;103(5):339-345. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30629/0023-2149-2025-103-5-339-345
Views:
23
Email this article 