UNASSIGNED: Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR), a new minimally invasive procedure for @entity1 requiring revascularization for multivessel coronary lesions, combines coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left anterior descending (LAD) lesions and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non-LAD coronary lesions. However, available data related to outcomes comparing the 3 revascularization therapies is limited to small studies.We conducted a search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library of Controlled Trials up to December 31, 2014, without language restriction. A total of 16 randomized trials (n=4858 @entity1 ) comparing HCR versus PCI or off-pump CABG (OPCAB) were included in this meta-analysis. The primary outcomes were major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), all-cause @entity204 , @entity583 ( @entity583 ), cerebrovascular events (CVE), and target vessel revascularization (TVR). Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effect and fixed-effect models. Ranking probabilities were used to calculate a summary numerical value: the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve.No significant differences were seen between the HCR and PCI in short term (in hospital and 30 days) with regard to MACCE (odds ratio [OR] = 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00-2.35), all-cause @entity204 (OR = 2.09, 95% CI 0.34-7.66), @entity583 (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.19-2.95), CVE (OR = 4.45, 95% CI 0.39-19.16), and TVR (OR = 6.99, 95% CI 0.17-39.39). However, OPCAB had lower MACCE than HCR (OR = 0.19, 95% CI 0.00-0.95). In midterm (1 year and 3 year), in comparison with HCR, PCI had higher all-cause @entity204 (OR = 5.66, 95% CI 0.00-13.88) and CVE (OR = 4.40, 95% CI 0.01-5.68), and lower @entity583 (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.00-2.86), TVR (OR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.05-2.26), and thus the MACCE (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.00-2.35). Off-pump CABG presented a better outcome than HCR with significant lower MACCE (OR = 0.17, 95% CI 0.01-0.68). Surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities showed that HCR may be the superior strategy for @entity11409 and @entity66 when regarded to MACCE (SUCRA=0.84), @entity583 (SUCRA=0.76) in short term, and regarded to MACCE (SUCRA=0.99), @entity583 (SUCRA=0.94), and CVE (SUCRA=0.92) in midterm.Hybrid coronary revascularization seemed to be a feasible and acceptable option for treatment of @entity66 and @entity11409 . More powerful evidences are required to precisely evaluate risks and benefits of the 3 therapies for @entity1 who have different clinical characteristics.

Clinical Outcomes of Revascularization Strategies for XXXX With @entity11409 /LMCA Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

@entity1 :: ('9606', 'Species') :: ['patients'] @entity66 :: ('MESH:D004194', 'Disease') :: ['LMCA disease'] @entity11409 :: ('4597', 'Gene') :: ['MVD'] @entity583 :: ('MESH:D009203', 'Disease') :: ['myocardial infarction', 'MI'] @entity204 :: ('MESH:D003643', 'Disease') :: ['death']
@entity1 :: (9606,Species) :: ['Patients']
