Abstract:Purpose of review: The optimal revascularization strategy for coronary artery disease depends on various factors, such as disease complexity, patient characteristics, and preferences. Including a heart team in complex cases is crucial to ensure optimal outcomes. Decision-making between percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting must consider each patient's clinical profile and coronary anatomy. While current practice guidelines offer some insight into the optimal revascularization approach for the various phenotypes of coronary artery disease, the evidence to support either strategy continues to evolve and grow. Given the large amount of contemporary data on revascularization, this review aims to comprehensively summarize the literature on coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention in patients across the spectrum of coronary artery disease phenotypes. Recent findings: Contemporary evidence suggests that for patients with triple vessel disease, coronary artery bypass grafting is preferred over percutaneous coronary intervention due to better long-term outcomes, including lower rates of death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. Similarly, for patients with left main coronary artery disease, both percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting can be considered, as they have shown similar efficacy in terms of major adverse cardiac events, but there may be a slightly higher risk of death with percutaneous coronary intervention. For proximal left anterior descending artery disease, both percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting are viable options, but coronary artery bypass grafting has shown lower rates of repeat revascularization and better relief from angina. The Synergy Between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery score can help in decision-making by predicting the risk of adverse events and guiding the choice between percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting. European and American guidelines both agree with including a heart team that can develop and lay out individualized, optimal treatment options with respect for patient preferences. The debate between coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention in multiple different scenarios will continue to develop as technology and techniques improve for both procedures. Risk factors, pre, peri, and post-procedural complications involved in both revascularization strategies will continue to be mitigated to optimize outcomes for those patients for which coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention provide ultimate benefit. Methods to avoid unnecessary revascularization continue to develop as well as percutaneous technology that may allow patients to avoid surgical intervention when possible. With such changes, revascularization guidelines for specific patient populations may change in the coming years, which can serve as a limitation of this time-dated review.

Current Status and Prospects of Hybrid Coronary Revascularization

Hybrid Coronary Revascularization in Multivessel Disease: The Ideal Strategy for Challenging Scenarios

Comparing clinical outcomes of hybrid coronary revascularization with open coronary artery bypass in patients with multi-vessels lesions

Hybrid coronary revascularization: position paper of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions

Staged hybrid coronary revascularization for treatment of multi-vessel coronary artery disease

Ten-year outcomes of hybrid coronary revascularization at a single center

Selective Two-staged Hybrid Coronary Revascularization for Patients with Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease

Minimally Invasive CABG or Hybrid Coronary Revascularization for Multivessel Coronary Diseases: Which is Best? A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis

The Clinical Experience of 2-staged Hybrid Procedure for Performing the Coronary Artery Revascularization

One-stop Hybrid Cardiac Surgery for Adults with Complex Heart Disease

One-Stop Hybrid Coronary Revascularization Versus Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease

The Recent Advances in Cell Delivery Approaches, Biochemical and Engineering Procedures of Cell Therapy Applied to Coronary Heart Disease

[Hybrid Coronary Revascularization of Minimally Invasive Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in a Patient with Left Main Coronary Stenosis]

Mid-term Outcomes of“2-staged”Hybrid Coronary Revascularization in Treating 73 Patients With Multi-vessel Coronary Artery Disease

[Comparison of Outcomes of Two Minimally Invasive Approaches for Multi-Vessel Coronary Revascularization].

Mid-term follow-up outcomes of 2-staged hybrid coronary revascularization compared with off-pump coronary artery bypass for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

Complete Revascularization Versus Culprit-Only Revascularization in ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Disease Patients Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis

Hybrid cardiac rehabilitation - The state of the science and the way forward

Feasibility and Safety of 2-staged Hybrid Technique for Treating Coronary Artery Disease Patients With Multi-vessel Lesions

The Current State of Coronary Revascularization: Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Versus Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

Comparison of hybrid procedure and open surgical revascularization for multilevel infrainguinal arterial occlusive disease.