Hybrid Coronary Revascularization: Perspective Current State After 25 Years of Start

Authors

  • Ahmed Abdelrahman Elassal, MD King Abdulaziz University, Department of Surgery, Cardiac Surgery Unit, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
  • Khalid Ebrahim Al-Ebrahim, FRCSC King Abdulaziz University, Department of Surgery, Cardiac Surgery Unit, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
  • Adel Mohammad Makhdoom, MD King Abdulaziz University, Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
  • Mazin Adel Fatani, FRCSC Umm Al-Qura University, Department of Surgery, Makkah, Saudi Arabia
  • Mohamed Hasan Ibrahim, MD Benha University, Department of Cardiology, Benha, Egypt

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1532/hsf.3693

Keywords:

Hybrid, Coronary bypass grafting, Percutaneous coronary intervention

Abstract

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) represents a minimally invasive revascularization strategy in which the durability of the internal mammary artery to the left anterior descending artery graft is combined with percutaneous coronary intervention to treat remaining lesions. It first was introduced in the mid-1990s and aspired to bring together the “best of both worlds” – the excellent patency rates and survival benefits associated with the durable left internal mammary artery graft to the left anterior descending artery alongside the good patency rates of drug-eluting stents, which outlive saphenous vein grafts to non–left anterior descending vessels. Although in theory this is a very attractive revascularization strategy, several years later, only small randomized controlled trials comparing HCR with coronary artery bypass grafting has recently emerged in the medical literature, raising concerns regarding HCR’s role. In the current review, we discuss HCR’s rationale, the current evidence behind it, its limitations, and procedural challenges.

References

Angelini GD, Wilde P, Salerno TA, Bosco G, Calafiore AM. 1996. Integrated left small thoracotomy and angioplasty for multivessel coronary artery revascularization. Lancet. 347:757–758.

Bachinsky WB, Abdelsalam M, Boga G, Kiljanek L, Mumtaz M, McCarty C. 2012. Comparative study of same sitting hybrid coronary artery revascularization versus off-pump coronary artery bypass in multivessel coronary artery disease. J Interv Cardiol. 25:460–8.

Basman C, Hemli JM, Kim MC, et al. 2020. Long-term survival in triple-vessel disease: Hybrid coronary revascularization compared to contemporary revascularization methods. J Card Surg. 35: 2710– 2718.

Bonatti J, Lehr E, Vesely MR, Friedrich G, Bonaros N, Zimrin D. 2010. Hybrid coronary revascularization: which patients? When? How? Curr Opin Cardiol. 25:568-574.

Chen JP, Srivastava S. 2010. A vanishing lesion. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 3:360–1.

Choi HJ, Kang J, Song H, Kim DY, Choi KB. 2017. Comparison of Coronary Artery Bypass Graft-First and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention-First Approaches for 2-Stage Hybrid Coronary Revascularization. Korean J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 50(4):247-254.

de Cannière D, Jansens JL, Goldschmidt-Clermont P, Barvais L, Decroly P, Stoupel E. 2001. Combination of minimally invasive coronary bypass and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in the treatment of doublevessel coronary disease: Two-year follow-up of a new hybrid procedure compared with "on-pump" double bypass grafting. Am Heart J. 142: 563–570.

Esteves V, Oliveira MAP, Feitosa FS, et al. 2020. Late clinical outcomes of myocardial hybrid revascularization versus coronary artery bypass grafting for complex triple- vessel disease: long-term follow-up of the randomized MERGING clinical trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. Jan 10 [E-pub ahead of print].

Ganyukov V, Kochergin N, Shilov A, et. al. 2020. Randomized clinical trial of surgical vs. percutaneous vs. hybrid revascularization in multivessel coronary artery disease: residual myocardial ischemia and clinical outcomes at one year—Hybrid Coronary Revascularization Versus Stenting or Surgery (HREVS). J Interv Cardiol. pp. 5458064.

Gąsior M, Zembala MO, Tajstra M. 2014. Hybrid revascularization for multivessel coronary artery disease. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Nov;7(11):1277–83.

Giambruno V, Hafiz A, Fox SA, Jeanmart H, Cook RC, Khaliel FH, Teefy P, Sridhar K, Lavi S, Bagur R, Randhawa VK, Iglesias I, Jones PM, Harle CC, Bainbridge D, Chu MW, Kiaii BB. 2017. Is the Future of Coronary Arterial Revascularization a Hybrid Approach? The Canadian Experience Across Three Centers. Innovations (Phila). Mar/Apr;12(2):82-86.).

Hage A, Giambruno V, Jones P, et al. 2019. Hybrid coronary revascularization versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: comparative effectiveness analysis with long-term follow-up. J Am Heart Assoc. 8: e014204.

Halkos ME, Ford L, Peterson D, Bluestein SM, Liberman HA, Kilgo P, Puskas JD, Guyton RA, Chowdhury R. 2014. The impact of hybrid coronary revascularization on hospital costs and reimbursements. Ann Thorac Surg. 97:1610–1615.

Halkos ME, Vassiliades TA, Douglas JS, et al. 2011. Hybrid coronary revascularization versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting for the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease. Ann Thorac Surg. 92:1695–702.

Harskamp RE. 2015. Current state and future direction of hybrid coronary revascularization. Curr Opin Cardiol. 30: 643–649.

Harskamp RE. 2016. Hybrid coronary revascularization: at the crossroads of surgical and percutaneous interventions, university of Amsterdam, Thesis. a-page:20, b-page:53.

Harskamp RE, Brennan JM, Xian Y, Halkos ME, Puskas JD, Thourani VH, et al. 2014. Practice patterns and clinical outcomes after hybrid coronary revascularization in the United States: an analysis from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Database. Circulation. 130:872–879.

Harskamp RE, Zheng Z, Alexander JH, Williams JB, Xian Y, Halkos ME, et al. 2013. Status Quo of Hybrid Coronary Revascularization for Multi-Vessel Coronary Artery Disease. Ann Thorac Surg. 96:2268–77.

Hillis LD, Smith PK, Anderson JL, et al. 2011. 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. J Am Coll Cardiol. 58: e123-e210.

Igor G, Marzia L. 2014. Hybrid Coronary Revascularization: the Future of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery or an Unfulfilled Promise? Circulation. 130:869-871.

Iwanski J, Raymond K, Douglas F, Alice S, Raymond B, Goldstein S, et al. 2016. Remodeling an infarcted heart: novel hybrid treatment with transmyocardial revascularization and stem cell therapy. Springerplus. 5(1): 738.

Kiaii B, Teefy P, Sridhar K, Chu M. 2014. Hybrid Coronary Revascularization, London heart sciences centre, technique guide.

Lioyd CT, Calafiore AM, Wilde P, et al. 1999. Integrated left anterior small thoracotomy and angioplasty for coronary artery revascularization. Ann Thorac Surg. 68:908-911.

Lowenstern A, Wu J, Bradley SM, Fanaroff AC, Tcheng JE, Wang TY. 2019. Current landscape of hybrid revascularization: a report from the NCDR CathPCI Registry. Am Heart J. 215:167–77.

Moreno PR, Stone GW, Gonzalez-Lengua CA, Puskas JD. 2020. The Hybrid Coronary Approach for Optimal Revascularization: JACC Review Topic of the Week. J Am Coll Cardiol. Jul 21;76(3):321-333.

Murphy GJ, Bryan AJ, Angelini GD. 2004. Hybrid coronary revascularization in the era of drug-eluting stents. Ann Thorac Surg. 78:1861 1867.

Nakayoshi T, Ueno T, Sasaki KI, et al. 2016. Differential angioscopic findings of neointimal coverage among first-, second-, and next generation drug-eluting stents. Int J Cardiol. 223: 450–451.

Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, et al. 2019. ESC Scientific Document Group, 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization, European Heart Journal, Volume 40, Issue 2, 07 January, Pages 87–165.

Puskas JD, Halkos ME, Derose JJ, et al. 2016. Hybrid coronary revascularization for the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease: a multicenter observational study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 68: 356–65.

Rastan AJ, Walther T, Falk V, et al. 2009. Does reasonable incomplete surgical revascularization affect early or long-term survival in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease receiving left internal mammary artery bypass to left anterior descending artery? Circulation.120: 70-77.

Repossini A, Di Bacco L, Rosati F, et al. 2018. Hybrid coronary revascularization versus percutaneous strategies in left main stenosis: a propensity match study. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 19:253-60.

Rodriguez M and Ruel M. 2016. Minimally Invasive Multivessel Coronary Surgery and Hybrid Coronary Revascularization: Can We Routinely Achieve Less Invasive Coronary Surgery?. Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J. Jan-Mar; 12(1): 14–19.

Saha T, Naqvi SY, Goldberg S. 2018. Hybrid Revascularization: A Review. Cardiology. 140(1):35-44).

Shen L, Hu S, Wang H, et al. 2013. One-stop hybrid coronary revascularization versus coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention for the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease: 3-year follow-up results from a single institution. J Am Coll Cardiol. 61: 2525–33.

Sianos G, Morel MA, Kappetein AP, et al. 2005. The SYNTAX score: an angiographic tool grading the complexity of coronary artery disease. EuroIntervention. 1:219-227.

Song Z, Shen L, Zheng Z, et al. 2016. One-stop hybrid coronary revascularization versus off-pump coronary artery bypass in patients with diabetes mellitus. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 151: 1695–701.

Srivastava S, Gadasalli S, Agusala M, et al. 2010. Beating heart totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass. Ann Thorac Surg. 89:1873–9.

Taggart DP, Altman DG, Gray AM, Lees B, Gerry S, Benedetto U, Flather M. 2016. Randomized trial of bilateral versus single internal-thoracic-artery grafts. N Engl J Med. 375: 2540– 2549.

Tajstra M, Hrapkowicz T, Hawranek M, et al. 2018. for the POL-MIDES Study Investigators. Hybrid coronary revascularization in selected patients with multivessel disease: 5-year clinical outcomes of the prospective randomized pilot study. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 11:847–52.

Teo KK, Cohen E, Buller C, et al. 2014. Canadian Cardiovascular Society/Canadian Association of Interventional Cardiology/Canadian Society of Cardiac Surgery position statement on revascularization--multivessel coronary artery disease. Can J Cardiol. 30: 1482–1491.

Vasileios FP, Antonio C, Alberto M, Francesco. 2015. Hybrid Coronary Revascularization Promising, But Yet to Take Off. Journal of American College of Cardiology. 65 :120-126.

Vassiliades TA, Kilgo PD, Douglas JS, et al. 2009. Clinical outcomes after hybrid coronary revascularization versus off-pump coronary artery bypass: a prospective evaluation. Innovations (Phila). 4:299–306.

Windecker S, Kolh P, Alfonso F, et al. 2014. 2014 ESC/EACTS 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). EuroIntervention. Sep 3.

Yamaji K, Raber L, Zanchin T, et al. 2016. Ten-year clinical outcomes of first-generation drug-eluting stents: the Sirolimus-Eluting vs Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revas¬cularization (SIRTAX) VERY LATE trial. Eur Heart J. 37: 3386–3395.

Published

2021-04-27

How to Cite

Elassal, A. A., Al-Ebrahim, khalid, Makhdoom, A. M., Fatani, M. ., & Ibrahim, M. (2021). Hybrid Coronary Revascularization: Perspective Current State After 25 Years of Start. The Heart Surgery Forum, 24(2), E392-E401. https://doi.org/10.1532/hsf.3693

Issue

Section

Articles