REVIEW article
Front. Cardiovasc. Med.
Sec. Coronary Artery Disease
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2025.1614843
This article is part of the Research TopicNew Concepts in Revascularization Strategies and Antithrombotic Therapies in Patients With Non-ST Elevated Acute Coronary SyndromesView all 3 articles
Revascularization Strategies in Non-ST segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: The Clash Continues
Provisionally accepted
Vittorio Zuccarelli1*
Filippo Giunti2,3Mauro Chiarito2,3
Carlo Andrea Pivato2,3
Giulio Giuseppe Stefanini2,3*- 1Hôpital Saint-Martin Caen, Caen, France
- 2Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Rozzano, Milan, Italy, Milan, Italy
- 3Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
For patients presenting with Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI), the choice and timing of revascularization remain complex and debated. This decision is influenced by clinical factors such as hemodynamic stability, comorbidities and surgical risk profile, as well as anatomical considerations like coronary lesion complexity and feasibility of achieving complete revascularization. Randomized controlled trials directly comparing CABG and PCI in NSTEMI are limited, making evidence-based comparisons challenging. However, data suggest that while PCI is less invasive and offers rapid revascularization, CABG often achieves more comprehensive revascularization, particularly in high-risk patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, especially diabetic patients, or unprotected left main coronary artery disease. Over the last two decades, the adoption of CABG in NSTEMI has declined, driven by the advantages of PCI's minimally invasive nature and advancements in stent technology. Nevertheless, CABG remains essential in cases of complex coronary anatomy or where PCI fails to achieve adequate revascularization. Available outcome data indicate that CABG offers significant long-term benefits, including lower rates of myocardial infarction and repeat revascularization, although it is associated with an increased short-term risk of stroke, and surgical related bleeding. This review critically analyzes clinical scenarios in NSTEMI, examining the risks and benefits of CABG and PCI. It highlights the importance of individualized decision-making, guided by multidisciplinary Heart Teams, to balance procedural risks and long-term outcomes for optimal patient care.
Keywords: NSTEMI, CABG, PCI, Multivessel disease (MVD), 3 vessels disease, Left main disease, diabetes, Hybrid coronary artery revascularisation
Received: 19 Apr 2025; Accepted: 29 Jul 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Zuccarelli, Giunti, Chiarito, Pivato and Stefanini. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence:
Vittorio Zuccarelli, Hôpital Saint-Martin Caen, Caen, France
Giulio Giuseppe Stefanini, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, 20089 Rozzano, Milan, Italy, Milan, Italy
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.