OBJECTIVETo compare the perioperative outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for treatment of complex coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction.

METHDOSThe clinical data of 966 patients admitted to our hospital from January 2003 to December 2013 with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction (ejection fraction ≤50%) were retrospectively reviewed. Among the patients, 386 underwent CABG and 580 received PCI. After matching for EuroSCORE risk factors and preoperative echocardiographic parameters, 135 patients with CABG and 135 with PCI were enrolled in this study. With hospital mortality and perioperative major complications as the endpoints, the early outcomes of the procedures were evaluated. Perioperative echocardiography was performed to evaluate the change of left ventricular geometry and function.

RESULTSCompared with CABG group, PCI group had significantly higher incidences of chronic lung disease (8.1% vs 0.7%, P=0.003) and recent myocardial infarction (64.4% vs 31.9%, P=0.000) but significantly lower left-main disease (12.6% vs 23.7%, P=0.018); the other baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. Patients with CABG had a greater number of treated target vessels than those with PCI (2.90±0.81 vs 1.67±0.73, P=0.000), and complete revascularization was more common in CABG group (94.8% vs 51.8%, P=0.000). No significant difference was found in perioperative variations of LVEF between the two groups, but patients with CABG had a greater variation in LVEDD than those with PCI. The hospital mortality and other major complications were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONBoth CABG and PCI are safe and reliable revascularization strategies for complex coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction, but CABG can achieve a higher rate of complete revascularization and better improves the left ventricular function.