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

ACC 2026 | DKCRUSH VIII: IVUS or angiography to guide PCI in complex coronary bifurcations

Intracoronary imaging guidance has become an established recommended strategy in complex coronary lesions. In the specific setting of complex bifurcations, uncertainty remained regarding the...

ACC 2026 | OPTIMAL: IVUS Guidance in PCI of the Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is considered an equivalent alternative to coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis and...

ACC 2026 | IVUS-CHIP Trial: Intravascular ultrasound–guided versus angiography-guided complex PCI

Optimization of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in complex lesions remains a relevant clinical challenge. In this context, the IVUS-CHIP trial was designed to evaluate...

ACC 2026 | ALL-RISE Trial: Coronary Physiological Assessment Using FFRangio

Coronary physiological assessment using pressure-wire techniques (FFR/iFR) carries a Class IA recommendation in ACC/AHA guidelines; however, its use remains limited due to factors such...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

Therapeutic strategies in carotid free-floating thrombus: evidence and controversies

Carotid free-floating thrombus (cFFT) is a rare entity with a high embolic risk, associated with acute neurological events such as stroke or transient ischemic...

The Two Sides of the Coin: What Do CHAMPION-AF and CLOSURE-AF Teach Us About Left Atrial Appendage Closure?

Letter to the editor: Juan Manuel Pérez Asorey Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAO) is currently going through one of the most interesting stages of...

CLOSURE-AF: Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure versus Medical Therapy in Atrial Fibrillation

Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure has been proposed as an alternative to anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation and high bleeding risk; however, comparative...