Authors
Sukovatikh B.S.1, Sidorov D.V.2, 3, 4, Bolomatov N.V.2, 5, Sereditsky A.V.3, 4, Vishnevsky V.I.4, Alyanov A.L.3, 4, Karasev A.Yu.3, 4, Shvets D.A.3, Sletova A.M.2, Gavrilina A.V.2, Orlova A.Yu.1, 2
1 Kursk State Medical University, Kursk
2 Kursk City Clinical Hospital of Emergency Medical Care, Kursk
3 Oryol regional clinical hospital, Orel
4 OGU named after. I.S. Turgenev, medical institute, Orel
5 Pirogov National Medical and Surgical Center, Moscow
Abstract
Purpose of the study. Comparison of the results of coronary stenting and coronary bypass surgery in patients with hereditary hypercholesterolemia and angina pectoris.
Materials and methods. An analysis of the results of treatment of 100 patients with hereditary hypercholesterolemia and exertional angina was carried out. As part of the preoperative preparation, all patients were classified according to the SYNTAX Score – in all cases, moderate severity of the lesion was revealed. Based on this, before the 2nd stage of surgical treatment, all patients were randomly divided into 2 equal groups: Group 1 included patients who underwent endovascular revascularization of the affected coronary artery as the 2nd stage of surgery treatment; Group 2 included patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) as the 2nd stage of revascularization.
Results. The results of endovascular stenting and cardiac bypass surgery demonstrate almost identical results 12 months after surgical treatment and in patients with moderate severity of lesions according to the SYNTAX Score. The quality of life of patients who have undergone coronary artery stenting is much higher than that of patients who have undergone open cardiac surgery.
Keywords: coronary artery bypass grafting, hereditary hypercholesterolemia, stent, coronary stenting, exertional angina.
References
1. Hillis LD, Smith PK, Anderson JL, Bittl JA, Bridges CR, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA Guideline for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2011; 124: e652–735. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e31823c074e.
2. Mamutov RSH, Mavlyanova DA, Mamaradzhabova DA. Sbornik klinicheskih protokolov po diagnostike, lecheniyu i profilaktike serdechno-sosudistyh zabolevanij dlya vrachej rajonnyh i gorodskih medicinskih ob”edinenij. Tashkent, 2015. (In Russ.)
3. Kardiovaskulyarnaya profilaktika 2022. Rossijskie nacional’nye re-komendacii. P.8/ (In Russ.) doi: 10.15829/1560-4071-2023-5452.
4. Khorolets EV, Shlyk SV. Possibilities of reperfusion therapy for patients with acute myocardial infarction. Consilium Medicum. 2020; 22(5): 87-91. (In Russ.) doi: 10.26442/20751753.2020.5.200182.
5. Holzhey DM, Jacobs S, Morchalski M, et al. Minimally invasive hybrid coronary artery revascularization. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2008, 86, 1856-1860. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2008.08.034.
6. Mohr FW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, Feldman TE, Ståhle E, Colombo A, et al. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with three-vessel disease and left main coronary disease: 5-year follow-up of the randomised, clinical SYNTAX trial. Lancet. 2013; 381(9867): 629-38. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60141-5.
7. Grigor’ev VS, Petrosyan KV, Abrosimov AV. Anatomicheskaya shkala ocenki riska SYNTAX Score – instrument opredeleniya tyazhesti porazheniya koronarnogo rusla i prognozirovaniya iskhodov endovaskulyarnyh vmesha-tel’stv. Kreativnaya kardiologiya. 2019; 13(2). (In Russ.) doi: 10.24022/ 1997-3187-2019-13-2-159-172.
8. Shuhaiber JH, Evans AN, Massad MG, Geha AS. Mechanisms and future directions for prevention of vein graft failure in coronary bypass surgery. European Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery. 2002; 22: 387-396. doi: 10.1016/s10107940(02)002531.
9. Ezhov MV, Sergienko IV, Rozhkova TA, et al. Russian guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of familial hypercholesterolemia. Atherosclerosis and dyslipidemia. 2016; 4: 21-29. (In Russ.) doi: 10.20969/ВСКМ.2017.10(2).72-79.
10. Kukharchuk VV, Malyshev PP, Meshkov AN. Semeinaia giperkholesterinemiia: sovremennye aspekty diagnostiki, profilaktiki i terapii. Kardiologiia. 2009; 49(1): 76-83. (In Russ.) doi: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.113.301218.
11. Catapano AL, Graham I, De Backer G, et al. ESC/EAS Guidelines for the Management of Dyslipidaemias: The Task Force for the Management of Dyslipidaemias of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) Developed with the special contribution of the European Assocciation for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR). Eur Heart J 2016. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz455.
12. Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B. SF-36 Health Survey. Manual and interpretation guide. The Health Institute, New England Medical Center. Boston, Mass. 1993.
13. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. SF-36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales: A User`s Manual. The Health Institute, New England Medical Center. Boston, Mass. 1994.
14. Ershova AI, Meshkov AN, Bazhan SS, et al. The prevalence of familial hypercholesterolemia in the West Siberian region of the Russian federation: A substudy of the ESSE-RF. PLoS One. 2017; 12(7): 1-10. doi: 10.1371/ journal.pone.0181148.
15. Sturm AC, Knowles JW, Gidding SS, et al. Clinical Genetic Testing for Familial Hypercholesterolemia: JACC Scientific Expert Panel. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018; 72(6): 662-80. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.05.044.
16. Poteev MA, YAkubov RA. Intraoperacionnyj menedzhment pri koro-narnom shuntirovanii: floumetriya kak sposob kontrolya kachestva. Prakticheskaya medicina. 2017; 4(105): 15-20. (In Russ.)
17. Nedoshivin AO, Kutuzova AE, Petrova NN, et al. Issledovanie kachestva zhizni i psihologicheskogo statusa bol’nyh s hronicheskoj serdech-noj nedostatochnost’yu. Serdechnaya nedostatochnost’. 2000; 1(4). (In Russ.)
18. Thuijs D, Kappetein AP, Serruys PW, 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 (London, England). 2020; 394(10206): 1325-1334. doi: 10. 1016/S0140-6736(19)31997-X.
19. Takahashi K, Serruys PW, 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. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)32114-0.
20. Farooq V, van Klaveren D, Steyerberg EW, et.al. Anatomical and clinical characteristics to guide decision making between coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention for individual patients: development and validation of SYNTAX score II. The Lancet. 2013; 381 (9867): 639-650. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60108-7.
21. Alekyan BG, Karapetyan NG, Kravchenko VV, et al. Rol’ shkaly SYN-TAX Score II v prinyatiya reshenij «serdechnoj komandoj» o metode lecheniya pacientov so slozhnymi porazheniyami koronarnyh arterij. Obzor literatury. Kardiologicheskij vestnik. 2019; 3(14): 17. (In Russ.) doi: 10.36396/Ms. 2019.14.03.003.
22. Campos CM, Stanetic BM, Farooq V, Walsh S, et al. Risk stratification in 3 vessel coronary artery disease: Applying the SYNTAX Score II in the Heart Team Discussion of the SYNTAX II trial. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 2015; 86(6): е229-е238. doi: 10.1002/ccd.25907.
