Navigating the decision between CABG and Stent

As we all know, Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG) and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) with stenting are two common treatments for coronary artery disease (CAD). CABG and stenting are used to restore blood flow to the heart in patients with blocked or narrowed coronary arteries. While both treatments can be effective, there are pros and cons to each, and the decision between CABG and stent depends on the patient’s individual case.

Companies like Medditour help the patients requiring treatment for their coronary artery disease connect them to international hospitals and facilitators so that they can get affordable treatments without long waiting hours.

In this article, let’s discuss more in detail about CABG vs. Stent in the treatment of CAD and try to navigate through the decision between CABG and Stenting.

CABG and PCI with stenting: An overview

CABG is a surgical procedure that involves creating a bypass around the blocked or narrowed portion of the coronary artery. This is done by taking a healthy blood vessel from another part of the body, such as the leg or chest, and using it to create a new pathway for blood to flow to the heart.

PCI with stenting, on the other hand, is a less invasive procedure that involves inserting a small metal mesh tube, called a stent, into the blocked or narrowed portion of the coronary artery. The stent helps to hold the artery open and restore blood flow to the heart.

CABG vs. Stent: A glimpse on the pros and cons

One of the main advantages of CABG over stenting is that it is more durable. CABG is a more invasive procedure, but the bypass graft can last for 10 to 15 years or even longer in some cases. Stents, on the other hand, can sometimes become clogged or re-narrow over time, requiring additional procedures.

Another advantage of CABG is that it may be more effective in patients with diabetes. Diabetes is a risk factor for CAD, and studies have shown that CABG may be more effective than stenting in patients with diabetes.

Aha Journals states that CABG is preferable in the presence of diabetes and/or heart failure when two or three coronary arteries are narrowed.

However, CABG also has some disadvantages. CABG requires a longer time for your health to recover. In addition, CABG is associated with a higher risk of complications, such as stroke and infection.

Stenting, on the other hand, is a less invasive procedure that can be done on an outpatient basis. Recovery time is typically shorter. Stenting is also associated with a lower risk of complications compared to CABG.

However, stenting also has some disadvantages. The stent can become clogged or re-narrow over time, requiring additional procedures. In addition, stenting is not as effective in patients with multiple blocked arteries or those with significant blockages in the left main coronary artery. An article from RWJ Barnabas Health states that as per Dr. Krause, CABG may also be the best option when an artery is too calcified to support a stent, or when it’s technically too difficult to place a stent in an artery.

Both CABG and stenting have been shown to be effective in treating CAD and improving outcomes for patients. However, there are pros and cons to each treatment, and the decision between the two depends on the patient’s individual case. The consulting doctor and surgeon have to decide on which is the right procedure, analyzing in-depth about the present condition of the patient.

Medical tourism for treatment of coronary artery disease

Medical tourism can also be a helpful option for patients who are seeking treatment for CAD. This can be a cost-effective option for patients who are seeking high-quality medical care but may not be able to afford the treatment in their home country.

Medical tourism can also provide access to treatments, for example, some countries may have more advanced technology or more experienced surgeons for CABG or stenting.

Platforms like Medditour also offer the facility of combining the treatment with vacation at international medical tourism destinations like India, Malaysia, Singapore, Turkey, Dubai, and Thailand.

In conclusion, both CABG and PCI with stenting are common treatments for coronary artery disease. With both have their own advantages and disadvantages the decision depends on the individual case. Medical tourism plays a vital role in the affordable treatment of coronary artery without compromising the quality.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *