Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery in Patients with STEMI or NSTEMI

Abstract

Coronary artery disease patients suffering from ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-STEMI (NSTEMI) require rapid decision on invasive therapy relying on state-of-the-art concepts. This article provides evidence-based recommendations on the choice between, or the combination of, the mechanistically different options, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)—with a special focus on multivessel disease patients. Furthermore, strategies of modern CABG in STEMI and NSTEMI patients are presented.

Keywords

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) - off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) - minimally invasive coronary bypass surgery (MICS-CABG) - microaxial pump-protected CABG (MPCAB) - percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) - ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) - non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI)

Note

The article is a part of the review article collection “The Power of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery” organized by the Working Group for Coronary Artery Disease of the GSTCVS.

Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 28. April 2025

Angenommen: 30. Juli 2025

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
14. August 2025

• References

• 1 Byrne RA, Rossello X, Coughlan JJ. et al; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2023 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes. Eur Heart J 2023; 44 (38) 3720-3826
• 2 Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A. et al; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 2019; 40 (02) 87-165
• 3 Kirov H, Caldonazo T, Rahouma M. et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention compared to coronary artery bypass grafting in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome. Sci Rep 2022; 12 (01) 5138
• 4 Farooq V, Serruys PW, Garcia-Garcia HM. et al. The negative impact of incomplete angiographic revascularization on clinical outcomes and its association with total occlusions: the SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 61 (03) 282-294
• 5 Elgendy IY, Mahmoud AN, Kumbhani DJ, Bhatt DL, Bavry AA. Complete or culprit-only revascularization for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomized trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2017; 10 (04) 315-324
• 6 Mohr FW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP. et al. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with three-vessel disease and left main coronary disease: 5-year follow-up of the randomised, clinical SYNTAX trial. Lancet 2013; 381 (9867) 629-638
• 7 Windecker S, Stortecky S, Stefanini GG. et al. Revascularisation versus medical treatment in patients with stable coronary artery disease: network meta-analysis. BMJ 2014; 348: g3859
• 8 Farkouh ME, Domanski M, Sleeper LA. et al; FREEDOM Trial Investigators. Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. N Engl J Med 2012; 367 (25) 2375-2384
• 9 Chang M, Lee CW, Ahn JM. et al. Comparison of outcome of coronary artery bypass grafting versus drug-eluting stent implantation for non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome. Am J Cardiol 2017; 120 (03) 380-386
• 10 Mehta SR, Wood DA, Storey RF. et al; COMPLETE Trial Steering Committee and Investigators. Complete revascularization with multivessel PCI for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2019; 381 (15) 1411-1421
• 11 Biscaglia S, Guiducci V, Escaned J. et al; FIRE Trial Investigators. Complete or culprit-only PCI in older patients with myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2023; 389 (10) 889-898
• 12 Stähli BE, Varbella F, Linke A. et al; MULTISTARS AMI Investigators. Timing of complete revascularization with multivessel PCI for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 2023; 389 (15) 1368-1379
• 13 Diletti R, den Dekker WK, Bennett J. et al; BIOVASC Investigators. Immediate versus staged complete revascularisation in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary disease (BIOVASC): a prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial. Lancet 2023; 401 (10383): 1172-1182
• 14 Stone GW, Kappetein AP, Sabik JF. et al; EXCEL Trial Investigators. Five-year outcomes after PCI or CABG for left main coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2019; 381 (19) 1820-1830
• 15 Persson J, Yan J, Angerås O. et al. PCI or CABG for left main coronary artery disease: the SWEDEHEART registry. Eur Heart J 2023; 44 (30) 2833-2842
• 16 Thuijs DJFM, Kappetein AP, Serruys PW. et al; SYNTAX Extended Survival Investigators. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial. Lancet 2019; 394 (10206): 1325-1334
• 17 Gaudino M, Hameed I, Khan FM. et al. Treatment strategies in ischaemic left ventricular dysfunction: a network meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2020; ezaa319 . Epub ahead of print
• 18 Velazquez EJ, Lee KL, Jones RH. et al; STICHES Investigators. Coronary-artery bypass surgery in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med 2016; 374 (16) 1511-1520
• 19 Farkouh ME, Domanski M, Dangas GD. et al; FREEDOM Follow-On Study Investigators. Long-term survival following multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes: the FREEDOM follow-on study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019; 73 (06) 629-638
• 20 Thiele H, Akin I, Sandri M. et al; CULPRIT-SHOCK Investigators. PCI strategies in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. N Engl J Med 2017; 377 (25) 2419-2432
• 21 White HD, Assmann SF, Sanborn TA. et al. Comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting after acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: results from the Should We Emergently Revascularize Occluded Coronaries for Cardiogenic Shock (SHOCK) trial. Circulation 2005; 112 (13) 1992-2001
• 22 Webb JG, Sanborn TA, Sleeper LA. et al; SHOCK Investigators. Percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiogenic shock in the SHOCK Trial Registry. Am Heart J 2001; 141 (06) 964-970
• 23 Smilowitz NR, Alviar CL, Katz SD, Hochman JS. Coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. Am Heart J 2020; 226: 255-263
• 24 Albert A, Ennker J, Hegazy Y. et al. Implementation of the aortic no-touch technique to reduce stroke after off-pump coronary surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2018; 156 (02) 544-554.e4
• 25 Zhao DF, Edelman JJ, Seco M. et al. Coronary artery bypass grafting with and without manipulation of the ascending aorta: a network meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017; 69 (08) 924-936
• 26 Benedetto U, Lau C, Caputo M. et al. Comparison of outcomes for off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in low-volume and high-volume centers and by low-volume and high-volume surgeons. Am J Cardiol 2018; 121 (05) 552-557
• 27 Hwang B, Williams ML, Tian DH, Yan TD, Misfeld M. Coronary artery bypass surgery for acute coronary syndrome: a network meta-analysis of on-pump cardioplegic arrest, off-pump, and on-pump beating heart strategies. J Card Surg 2022; 37 (12) 5290-5299
• 28 Biancari F, Santini F, Tauriainen T. et al. Epiaortic ultrasound to prevent stroke in coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 2020; 109 (01) 294-301
• 29 Albert A, Assmann A, Assmann AK, Aubin H, Lichtenberg A. Operative Techniques in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery: An Illustrated Guide to Personalized Therapy. 1st ed.. Springer Nature; 2020
• 30 Katahira S, Sugimura Y, Mehdiani A. et al. Coronary artery bypass grafting under sole Impella 5.0 support for patients with severely depressed left ventricular function. J Artif Organs 2022; 25 (02) 158-162
• 31 Assmann AK, Arik-Doganay M, Waßenberg S, Akhyari P, Lichtenberg A, Assmann A. Microaxial pump-supported coronary surgery without CPB to optimize outcome in severely impaired left ventricles. ESC Heart Fail 2025; 12 (04) 2749-2758
• 32 Deppe AC, Liakopoulos OJ, Kuhn EW. et al. Minimally invasive direct coronary bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention for single-vessel disease: a meta-analysis of 2885 patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2015; 47 (03) 397-406 , discussion 406
• 33 Patel NC, Hemli JM, Seetharam K. et al. Minimally invasive coronary bypass versus percutaneous coronary intervention for isolated complex stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2022; 163 (05) 1839-1846.e1
• 34 Assmann AK, Sixt SU, Lichtenberg A, Assmann A. Technique of bilateral internal thoracic artery minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting with double-lung ventilation. JTCVS Tech 2023; 20: 87-91
• 35 Verevkin A, Von Aspern K, Tolboom H. et al. Total arterial multivessel minimally invasive coronary artery bypass surgery: 5-year outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg 2024; 118 (05) 1044-1051