Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
VASCULAR DISEASE MANAGEMENT, cilt.19, sa.2, ss.34-38, 2022 (Scopus)
Abstract: Objectives. Invasive treatment strategies have been extensively investigated in stable coronary artery disease,
but their impact on clinical outcomes remains controversial. It is unknown if simple percutaneous intervention is
more beneficial than medical therapy in patients with isolated side-branch (SB) disease. Therefore, we aimed to compare
the effect of invasive and medical treatment strategies on long-term adverse outcomes in patients with isolated non-ostial
SB stable coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods. A total of 176 patients diagnosed with isolated non-ostial SB stable
CAD by coronary angiography were included in this study. The study population was categorized into 2 groups according
to treatment strategy: 97 patients with invasive therapy and 79 patients with medical therapy. Isolated SB stable CAD
was defined as ≥ 50% stenosis in any SB without significant stenosis in the main coronary artery. Major adverse cardiac
and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) were defined as all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and cerebrovascular events
(CVE). Results. The median follow-up time for the groups was 50 (2-110) months. According to the American College of
Cardiology lesion classification, the frequency of diagonal artery disease and B2- and C-type lesions was similar between
the groups (P=.346 and P=.481, respectively). Total MACCE rate was 22.2%; there was no significant difference between
the groups (22.8% vs 21.6%, respectively; P=.857). Prior CVE were defined as independent predictors of MACCE
(hazard ratio, 4.086; confidence interval, 95% [1.281-13.052], P=.017). Conclusion. No significant difference was seen
between invasive and medical treatment strategies in terms of adverse clinical events in patients with isolated non-ostial
SB stable CAD.