Hybrid Coronary Revascularization: A Valid Option?

In this article, we will examine the use of hybrid coronary revascularization to treat multivessel coronary artery disease. 

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the most common cause of morbidity and mortality in the western world. 

El éxito en las CTO reduce la isquemia residual local y a distancia

The presence of multivessel CAD is associated to high short and midterm mortality and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) is at present the gold standard treatment according to guidelines. However, this strategy often involves complications and longer hospital stay that will take the toll on health care resources. 

In this scenario, PCI has become a valid alternative whenever certain factors will contribute to increase surgical risk. 

It has been a while now since the first hybrid revascularization (HR) was proposed to treat a select group of patients with a mammary artery bypass graft to the anterior descending and DES stenting to the rest of the compromised vessels. Complete revascularization was similar in both groups. 

In this meta-analysis of 14 studies (12 observational and 2 randomized) including 4226 patients, 1649 received HR (39%) and 2617 CABG.

Read also: Invasive Myocardial Viability Indexes.

Populations were similar: 76% were men, 81% had hypertension, one third diabetes, 4% kidney function deterioration, 55% low ejection fraction, 15% left main lesion, triple vessel disease, SYNTAX Score 22 and EuroSCORE 4.4.

At 30 days there were no differences in mortality (1.28% RH vs. 1.43% CABG) or MACCE. Patients undergoing HR presented shorter hospital stay, and lower rates of transfusion and acute kidney failure, even though reintervention for bleeding was similar. 

At 5 years, mortality was similar between the strategies (odds ratios [OR]: 1.55; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92−2.62; I2 = 83.0%), as was MACCE ((OR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.47−2.01; I2 = 74.7%).

Read also: Real-World Revascularization Strategy for Left Main Coronary Artery: Surgery or PCI?

CABG showed lower need for reintervention at 29 month followup (OR: 1.51; 95% CI: 1.03−2.20; I2 = 18%).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis suggest hybrid revascularization is feasible and safe to treat multivessel disease. However, hybrid revascularization benefits must be carefully outweighed against increased risk of long-term repeat revascularization. This is why it is critical to thoroughly assess and select patients. 

More studies are needed to better assess the differences in long term mortality between these two strategies.

Dr. Carlos Fava - Consejo Editorial SOLACI

Dr. Carlos Fava.
Member of the editorial board of SOLACI.org.

Original Title: Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in multivessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD): A meta‐analysis of 14 studies comprising 4226 patients.

Reference: Sanjana Nagraj, et al. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2022;100:1182–1194.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

More articles by this author

CRT 2026 | CUT-DRESS Trial: Lesion Preparation with Cutting Balloon

In-stent restenosis (ISR) continues to represent a relevant clinical challenge in contemporary coronary angioplasty practice. Despite advances in drug-eluting stents, neointimal hyperplasia and suboptimal...

CRT 2026 | Clopidogrel vs Aspirin as Long-Term Monotherapy After Coronary Angioplasty

The use of aspirin as chronic antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has historically been the standard recommended by international guidelines. However, recent...

Bioresorbable devices vs DES in patients at high risk of restenosis. Seven-year follow-up of the COMPARE-ABSORB trial

Studies with second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) have shown that the rate of target lesion failure (TLF) increases linearly up to 5–10 years of follow-up,...

Sheathless Femoral Impella: A New Strategy to Reduce Vascular Complications in High-Risk PCI?

Patients with complex coronary artery disease or cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may benefit from the hemodynamic support provided by percutaneous ventricular...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

CRT 2026 | TAVI-CLOSE Trial: Dual Suture vs Suture + Plug for Vascular Closure After Transfemoral TAVI

The transfemoral approach is the predominant strategy for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Although vascular complications are currently less frequent, they remain relevant determinants...

CRT 2026 | NAVITOR IDE: Hemodynamic Outcomes and 5-Year Durability of an Intra-Annular Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve

As TAVI expands into younger populations and patients with lower surgical risk, prosthesis durability has become a key aspect of long-term management. The NAVITOR...

CRT 2026 | CUT-DRESS Trial: Lesion Preparation with Cutting Balloon

In-stent restenosis (ISR) continues to represent a relevant clinical challenge in contemporary coronary angioplasty practice. Despite advances in drug-eluting stents, neointimal hyperplasia and suboptimal...