Posts Tagged ‘ellis’

Can we advice CABG for single vessel disease  ?

Yes, CABG  may be indicated  in

  • Critical , proximal , complex  LAD disease   with or without  ostium involvement.
  • Many of the bifurcation lesions with large and significant  side branch
  • Small caliber LAD with diffuse disease .

When these occur  in diabetic  subjects , the  indication for CABG is more certain .

* Present generation cardiologists  would feel  every  lesion  is  stentable and should not be referred to the surgeon .But it should be emphasized here,   technical feasibility alone  ,  does not  imply  PCI is superior and ideal in all coronary interventions.

Can we do a CABG  in  single vessel disease  with  normal  LAD ?

CABG is  very rarely  indicated   for isolated RCA or LCX disease. It should be consciously avoided in this patient population.

This is because the at risk myocardium  supplied by these vessels are far less than that of LAD. PCI  is  preferred    in these vessels .(Ofcourse , after considering medical management  ) .

CABG is  ,  too traumatic a  surgery , to  offer  in this  low  risk  coronary  lesions.


CABG  can still be done in following situations  for non LAD single vessel disease.

  • Left dominant circulation  with  complex lesions in LCX /OMs.
  • It is common to see diffuse , long segment  and severe disease of RCA with normal LAD /LCX system .PCI is not feasible in this subset.
  • Failed PCI
  • Recurrent instent restenosis.
  • Bail out CABG after a acute complication during PCI

One should remember ,  inability to do a PCI  does not  mean ,  the patient  should   land in surgeon’s table .We should recall , from our memory medical management is an effective and established form of treatment in single vessel disease ( Mainly for non LAD , and some cases of LAD also !)

Read Full Post »

Left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) often evokes  a panic reaction  among cardiologists .Not every LMD deserve that re. To  label  it as  significant, we have a criteria ,  that is 50% diameter stenosis.  So what you do , for a tapering  or narrowed left main with 40% stenosis. Isolated insignificant left main is rare *, but real incidence is not known.  LMCAD  is  most often due to  , atherosclerosis of left main coronary artery without limiting the flow.

What are the options ?

  • Leave it alone, with intensive medical management assisted by high dose statin(80mg)
  • Elective PCI with stenting , even though the lesion is not significant.

*If associated LAD  or LCX is there decision making is easier .

How  significant is a coronary stenosis ?

The significance of a coronary lesion with reference to “lumen diameter obstruction” is basically flawed. The significance of a coronary stenosis, by tradition is  based on it’s hemodynamic impact ,right from the  CASS days in early seventies.Unfortunately our mind set has not changed even after realising    non obstructive – sub critical lesion is more prone for acute coronary syndrome.  Is it not ironical to call a  40% lesion a non significant one !

So, the  significance of coronary stenosis is two fold.

  1. Hemodynamic  significance
  2. Clinical and  pathologic significance

The former predisposes to often chronic stable angina, later likely to result in ACS.

How will you approach a apparently insignificant left main disease ?

A 40 % lesion in left main is hemodynamically not significant , but pathologically very significant.It needs intensive treatment. Plaque passification with medical approach is first choice.If the lesion morphology is eccentric,  has irregular margins or involves  LAD  or LCX ostium doing a PCI or even a CABG is to be considered in spite of the lesion is  hemodynamically insignificant .

Why , PCI is   considered  “not appropriate”  for   less tighter lesions , even though these lesions  have great clinical significance ?

The answer is simple, The risks  and the  potential cost are more than the benefit !

And further ,  stents are  not innocuous devices  either  , they  always carry a risk of sudden occlusion as like  a sub critical lesion  !

Answer to the title question

True incidence is not known . Our experince (Class 1 c evidence) would suggest Left main disease constitutes up to 10 % of CAD.Among this one third would be hemodynamically insignificant

Suggested reading

Handbook of Left Main Stem Disease

edited by Seung-Jung Park



Read Full Post »