Skip to main content
Log in

Different Treatment Strategies for Patients with Multivessel Coronary Disease and High SYNTAX Score

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Cell Biochemistry and Biophysics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We sought to evaluate the prognosis of different treatment strategies on patients with multivessel coronary disease and high SYNTAX score. 171 patients with multivessel coronary disease and SYNTAX score ε33, who underwent coronary angiography between July 2009 and July 2010 at our hospital were retrospectively selected and divided into incomplete and complete revascularization intervention groups (IR), a coronary artery bypass surgery group (CABG), a conservative drug therapy group according to treatment strategies chosen and agreed by the patients. These patients were followed up for 19.44 ± 5.73 months by telephone or outpatient service. We found the medical treatment group has a lower overall survival than the IR, CR group, and CABG group (P log-rank values are 0.03, 0.03, and 0.02, respectively). The medical treatment group also has a lower survival than the IR group, CR group, and CABG group in cerebral stroke and recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) (P log-rank values are 0.004, 0.03, and 0.001, respectively) and MACE events (P log-rank values are 0.003, 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). The medical treatment group and IR group have lower survival in recurrent angina pectoris than the CR group and CABG group (P log-rank values are 0.02, 0.02 and 0.03, 0.008, respectively). There are no significant differences between the CR group and the CABG group in number of deaths, strokes and recurrent MIs, MACE events, angina pectoris (P log-rank values are 0.69, 0.53, and 0.86, respectively). The IR group shows a lower survival than the CR group and CABG group only in angina pectoris (P log-rank values are 0.03 and 0.008, respectively). For the patients with a high SYNTAX score, medical treatment is still inferior to revascularization therapy (interventional therapy or coronary artery bypass surgery). It appears that the CABG is not obviously superior to the coronary intervention therapy. Complete revascularization and coronary artery bypass grafting treatments simply have better survival in angina pectoris compared to the incomplete revascularization. Therefore, individual treatment strategies are recommended and more trials are required to study these effects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wijns, W., et al. (2010). Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the EuropeanSociety of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio—Thoracic Surgery (EACTS), European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). European Heart Journal, 31, 2501–2555.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Scherff, F., Vassalli, G., Sürder, D., Mantovani, A., et al. (2011). The SYNTAX score predicts early mortality risk in the elderly with acute coronary syndrome having primary PCI. Journal of Invasive Cardiology, 23, 505–510.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tanaka, T., Seto, S., Yamamoto, K., Kondo, M., et al. (2013). An assessment of risk factors for the complexity of coronary artery disease using the SYNTAX score. Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics, 28, 16–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. SYNTAX Working Group. SYNTAX score calculator. Available at: www.syntaxscore.com.

  5. Sianos, G., Morel, M. A., Kappetein, A. P., et al. (2005). The SYNTAX score: An angiographic tool grading the complexity of coronary artery disease. Euro Intervention, 1, 219–227.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. William, J., Francis, A., et al. (2009). The Syntax score predicts peri-procedural myocardial necrosis during percutaneous coronary intervention. International Journal of Cardiology, 135, 60–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. He, J.-Q., Gao, Y.-C., Lu, S.-Z., et al. (2011). Syntax score predicts clinical outcome in patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Chinese Medical Journal, 124, 704–709.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wykrzykowska, Joanna J., Serruys, Patrick W., et al. (2010). Value of the SYNTAX score for risk assessment in the all-comers population of the randomized multicenter LEADERS (Limus Eluted from A Durable versus ERodable Stent coating) Trial. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 56, 272–277.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Anjan, K., et al. (2011). The SYNTAX score: Usefulness, limitations, and future directions. Journal of Invasive Cardiology, 23, 511–512.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Valgimigli, M., Serruys, P. W., Tsuchida, K., et al. (2007). Cyphering the complexity of coronary artery disease using the syntax score to predict clinical outcome in patients with three—Vessel lumen obstruction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. American Journal of Cardiology, 99, 1072–1081.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kappetein, Arie Pieter, Dawkins, Keith D., et al. (2006). Current percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting practices for three-vessel and left main coronary artery disease. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, 2006(29), 486–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kapur, Akhil, Hall, Roger J., et al. (2010). Randomized comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention with coronary artery bypass grafting in diabetic patients. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 55, 432–440.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim, Y. H., Park, D. W., et al. (2011). Impact of angiographic complete revascularization after drug-eluting stent implantation or coronary artery bypass graft surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease. Circulation, 123, 2373–2381.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sarno, G., Garg, S., Onuma, Y., et al. (2010). Impact of completeness of revascularization on the five-year outcome in percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft patients (from the ARTS-II study. American Journal of Cardiology, 106, 1369–1375.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tonino, P. A. L., Fearon, W. F., & De Bruyne, B. (2010). Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study: Fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 55, 2816–2821.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Pijls, N. H., Fearon, W. F., et al. (2010). Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: 2-Year follow-up of the FAME (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 56, 177–184.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Boden, W. E., O’Rourke, R. A., et al. (2007). Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. The New England Journal of Medicine, 356, 1503–1516.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Favarato, M. E., Hueb, W., et al. (2007). Quality of life in patients with symptomatic multivessel coronary artery disease: A comparative post hoc analyses of medical, angioplasty or surgical strategies-MASS II trial. International Journal of Cardiology, 116, 364–370.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dalin Jia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Xia, F., Jia, D., Han, Y. et al. Different Treatment Strategies for Patients with Multivessel Coronary Disease and High SYNTAX Score. Cell Biochem Biophys 73, 769–774 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12013-015-0588-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12013-015-0588-6

Keywords

Navigation