Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Kommentar zu den gemeinsamen „Guidelines on myocardial revascularization“ der European Society of Cardiology (ESC) und der European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)

Comments on the joint guidelines on myocardial revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)

  • Leitlinien
  • Published:
Der Kardiologe Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Die European Society of Cardiology und die European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery haben im September 2010 erstmals gemeinsam eine Leitlinie zur myokardialen Revaskularisation herausgegeben. Die neue Leitlinie stellt den ganzheitlichen Ansatz in der Behandlung ischämischer Herzerkrankungen in den Vordergrund. Auf dem Boden des aktuellen Wissenstands entwickelt sie interdisziplinär abgestimmte Behandlungskonzepte für die konservative, katheterbasierte und chirurgische Therapie. Die Leitlinie nimmt Stellung zu Fragen der Indikationsstellung zur koronaren Revaskularisation, zu Fragen der Präferenz von Bypasschirurgie oder Katheterintervention sowie zu technischen und pharmakologischen Aspekten der myokardialen Revaskularisation. Der vorliegende Kommentar will auf wichtige Neuerungen aufmerksam machen, kritische Punkte hinterfragen und die Umsetzbarkeit im Bereich des deutschen Gesundheitswesens beleuchten. Berücksichtigt werden dabei auch neuere Studienergebnisse, die erst nach der Entstehung der Leitlinie bekannt wurden.

Abstract

In September 2010 the European Society of Cardiology and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) published joint guidelines on myocardial revascularization for the first time. The new guidelines promote an integrated approach to the management of ischemic heart disease. Based on currently available evidence the new guidelines elaborate interdisciplinary treatment concepts for conservative, catheter-based and surgical therapy. The guidelines address the indications for myocardial revascularization, the choice of bypass surgery versus catheter intervention as well as technical and pharmacological aspects of myocardial revascularization. This commentary intends to highlight important new aspects, to challenge critical issues and to address the implementation in the environment of the German healthcare system. New study results that appeared after publication of the guidelines are also considered.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1

Literatur

  1. Wijns W, Kolh P, Danchin N et al (2010) Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Eur Heart J 31:2501–2555

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Silber S, Albertsson P, Aviles FF et al (2005) Guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions. The Task Force for percutaneous coronary interventions of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 26:804–847

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fox K, Garcia MA, Ardissino D et al (2006) Guidelines on the management of stable angina pectoris: executive summary. The Task Force on the management of stable angina pectoris of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 27:1341–1381

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schömig A, Mehilli J, Waha A de et al (2008) A meta-analysis of 17 randomized trials of a percutaneous coronary intervention-based strategy in patients with stable coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 52:894–904

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK et al (2007) Optimal medical therapy with or without pci for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 356:1503–1516

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kappetein AP, Feldman TE, Mack MJ et al (2011) Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with drug-eluting stenting for the treatment of left main and/or three-vessel disease: 3-year follow-up of the Syntax Trial. Eur Heart J 32:2125–2134

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Serruys PW (2011) The 4-year outcomes of the Syntax Trial in the subset of patients with left main disease. Transcath Ther, in press

  8. Serruys PW (2011) DES in complex mutlivessel disease: the Syntax Trial at 4 years. Overall results and breakdown of the 3rd cohort. Transcath Ther, in press

  9. Montalescot G, White HD, Gallo R et al (2006) Enoxaparin versus unfractionated heparin in elective percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med 355:1006–1017

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Hochholzer W, Buettner HJ, Trenk D et al (2008) Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting as primary revascularization in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Am J Cardiol 102:173–179

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fortescue EB, Kahn K, Bates DW (2001) Development and validation of a clinical prediction rule for major adverse outcomes in coronary bypass grafting. Am J Cardiol 88:1251–1258

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. O’Connor GT, Plume SK, Olmstead EM et al (1991) A regional prospective study of in-hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass grafting. The Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. JAMA 266:803–809

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, McCabe CH et al (2007) Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 357:2001–2015

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Wallentin L, Becker RC, Budaj A et al (2009) Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 361:1045–1057

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kastrati A, Mehilli J, Neumann FJ et al (2006) Abciximab in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention after clopidogrel pretreatment: the ISAR-REACT 2 Randomized Trial. JAMA 295:1531–1538

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Stone GW, McLaurin BT, Cox DA et al (2006) Bivalirudin for patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 355:2203–2216

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Stone GW, Bertrand ME, Moses JW et al (2007) Routine upstream initiation vs deferred selective use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in acute coronary syndromes: the acuity timing trial. JAMA 297:591–602

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Kastrati A, Neumann FJ, Mehilli J et al (2008) Bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin during percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med 359:688–696

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Ferguson JJ, Califf RM, Antman EM et al (2004) Enoxaparin vs unfractionated heparin in high-risk patients with non-st-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes managed with an intended early invasive strategy: primary results of the Synergy Randomized Trial. JAMA 292:45–54

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Blazing MA, Lemos JA de, White HD et al (2004) Safety and efficacy of enoxaparin vs unfractionated heparin in patients with non-st-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes who receive tirofiban and aspirin: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 292:55–64

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Mehta SR, Granger CB, Eikelboom JW et al (2007) Efficacy and safety of fondaparinux versus enoxaparin in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: results from the OASIS-5 trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 50:1742–1751

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Sibbing D, Schulz S, Braun S et al (2010) Antiplatelet effects of clopidogrel and bleeding in patients undergoing coronary stent placement. J Thromb Haemost 8:250–256

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Boersma E (2006) The primary coronary angioplasty vs thrombolysis group. Does time matter? A pooled analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing primary percutaneous coronary intervention and in-hospital fibrinolysis in acute myocardial infarction patients. Eur Heart J 27:779–788

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Pinto DS, Kirtane AJ, Nallamothu BK et al (2006) Hospital delays in reperfusion for st-elevation myocardial infarction:implications when selecting a reperfusion strategy. Circulation 114:2019–2025

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ellis SG, Tendera M, Belder MA de et al (2008) Facilitated pci in patients with st-elevation myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 358:2205–2217

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Busk M, Kaltoft A, Nielsen SS et al (2009) Infarct size and myocardial salvage after primary angioplasty in patients presenting with symptoms for ( 12 h vs. 12–72 h. Eur Heart J 30:1322–1330

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Schömig A, Mehilli J, Antoniucci D et al (2005) Mechanical reperfusion in patients with acute myocardial infarction presenting more than 12 hours from symptom onset: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 293:2865–2872

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. De Luca G, Suryapranata H, Stone GW et al (2005) Abciximab as adjunctive therapy to reperfusion in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. JAMA 293:1759–1765

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Mehilli J, Kastrati A, Schulz S et al (2009) Abciximab in patients with acute st-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention after clopidogrel loading: a randomized double-blind trial. Circulation 119:1933–1940

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Stone GW, Witzenbichler B, Guagliumi G et al (2008) Bivalirudin during primary pci in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 358:2218–2230

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Van’t Hof AW, Ten Berg J, Heestermans T et al (2008) Prehospital initiation of tirofiban in patients with st-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary angioplasty (on-time 2): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 372:537–546

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Stettler C, Allemann S, Wandel S et al (2008) Drug eluting and bare metal stents in people with and without diabetes: collaborative network meta-analysis. BMJ 337:a1331

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Interessenkonflikt

Der korrespondierende Autor gibt für sich und seine Koautoren an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Herz-Zentrum Bad Krozingen, Südring 15, 79189, Bad Krozingen, Deutschland

    F.-J. Neumann

  2. Klinik für Herz- und Gefäßchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Deutschland

    J. Cremer

  3. Klinik für Herz- und Gefäßchirurgie, Universitätsspital Zürich, Zürich, Schweiz

    V. Falk

  4. Kardiologische Praxis in den Main-Taunus-Kliniken, Bad Soden, Deutschland

    N. Reifart

  5. Kardiologische Gemeinschaftspraxis und Praxisklinik, München, Deutschland

    S. Silber

  6. Klinik für Thorax- und kardiovaskuläre Chirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Essen, Deutschland

    M. Thielmann

Authors
  1. F.-J. Neumann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Cremer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. V. Falk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. N. Reifart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. S. Silber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. M. Thielmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F.-J. Neumann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Neumann, FJ., Cremer, J., Falk, V. et al. Kommentar zu den gemeinsamen „Guidelines on myocardial revascularization“ der European Society of Cardiology (ESC) und der European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Kardiologe 6, 94–104 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12181-012-0400-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12181-012-0400-4

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation