Long term outcomes of drug-eluting stent versus coronary artery bypass grafting for left main coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis

Background It is still controversial whether percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent (DES) is safe and effective compared to coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease at long-term follow up (≥ 3 years). Methods Eligible studies were selected by searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library up to December 6, 2016. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke during the longest follow-up. Death, cardiac death, MI, stroke and repeat revascularization were the secondary outcomes. Results Four randomized controlled trials and twelve adjusted observational studies involving 14,130 patients were included. DES was comparable to CABG regarding the occurrence of the primary endpoint (HR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.86-1.03). Besides, DES was significantly associated with higher incidence of MI (HR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.09-2.22) and repeat revascularization (HR = 3.09, 95% CI: 2.33-4.10) compared with CABG, while no difference was found between the two strategies regard as the rate of death, cardiac death and stroke. Furthermore, DES can reduce the risk of the composite endpoint of death, MI or stroke (HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.67-0.95) for ULMCA lesions with SYNTAX score ≤ 32. Conclusions Although with higher risk of repeat revascularization, PCI with DES appears to be as safe as CABG for ULMCA disease at long-term follow up. In addition, treatment with DES could be an alternative interventional strategy to CABG for ULMCA lesions with low to intermediate anatomic complexity.     

Predictors of long‐term outcomes after bypass grafting versus drug‐eluting stent implantation for left main or multivessel coronary artery disease

Background : We assessed predictors of long‐term outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus those after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug‐eluting stents (DES) in 3,230 patients with left main or multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods and Results : Data were pooled from the BEST, PRECOMBAT, and SYNTAX trials. Age, chronic kidney disease, chronic obstructive lung disease, left ventricular dysfunction, and peripheral arterial disease (PAD) were common predictors of all‐cause mortality. Diabetes mellitus, previous myocardial infarction (MI), and SYNTAX score were independent predictors of all‐cause mortality in the PCI group, but not in the CABG group. In the CABG group, age was the only risk factor for MI; left ventricular dysfunction, hypertension, and PAD were risk factors for stroke. On the other hand, in the PCI group, incomplete revascularization and previous MI were risk factors for MI; age and previous stroke for stroke. In addition, chronic kidney disease significantly correlated with a composite outcome of death, MI, or stroke in the CABG group, and incomplete revascularization and previous MI in the PCI group. Conclusions : Simple clinical variables and SYNTAX score differentially predict long‐term outcomes after CABG versus those after PCI with DES for left main or multivessel CAD. Those predictors might help to guide the choice of revascularization strategy. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Revascularization in severe left ventricular dysfunction: outcome comparison of drug-eluting stent implantation versus coronary artery by-pass grafting.

OBJECTIVE: We compared the outcome of drug eluting stent (DES) implantation (Sirolimus or Paclitaxel) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and severe left ventricular (LV) dysfunction with the outcome of a similar group of patients undergoing coronary artery by-pass grafting (CABG). BACKGROUND: Revascularization provides long-term benefits in patients with severe LV dysfunction. However the modality to achieve it is still unsettled in this high risk group of patients. METHODS: Two-hundred-twenty patients (20% women) with severe LV dysfunction (LV Ejection Fraction 相似文献   

冠状动脉左主干病变的治疗策略

冠状动脉(冠脉)左主干病变首选冠脉搭桥手术(CABG),尽可能选择不停跳CABG。急诊CABG风险较高,手术适应证①严重的左主干病变(>75%),尤其"无保护"左主干病变;②左主干病变>50%,并(或)有3支病变,出现严重的危及生命的室性心律失常;③左主干病变伴有急性冠脉综合征。     

无保护左主干病变冠状动脉搭桥术与雷帕霉素洗脱支架治疗的对比研究

目的:回顾性分析无保护左主干病变患者使用雷帕霉素洗脱支架(DES)的经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)与冠状动脉旁路移植手术(CABG)治疗的中、远期疗效,并探讨应用SYNTAX SCORE来评估病变风险与临床事件的相关性。方法:本研究回顾性收集了176例无保护左主干病变患者,其中CABG组80例,PCI-DES组96例。收集患者的基本情况、左主干病变特点及SYNTAX评分、CABG和PCI手术情况,随访患者术后3年的主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE)的发生率。结果:术后3年随访,PCI-DES组与CABG组的MACCE发生率及无MACCE生存率比较差异无统计学意义,但PCI组靶血管再次血运重建率(TVR)明显高于CABG组(P<0.05)。用SYNTAX SCORE把PCI-DES和CABG两组患者分为高积分组(≥30.0)和低积分组(<30.0):高积分组,术后3年PCI-DES亚组MACCE事件发生率高于CABG亚组(23.53%∶18.05%,P<0.05),无MACCE事件生存率低于CABG亚组(51.47%∶70.83%,P<0.05)。低积分组,术后3年MACCE事件发生率CABG亚组高于PCI-DES亚组(12.50%∶7.14%,P>0.05),而无MACCE事件生存率低于PCI-DES亚组(75.00%∶82.14%,P<0.05)。结论:PCI-DES与CABG治疗无保护左主干病变患者总体疗效相似。用SYNTAX SCORE指导无保护左主干病变血管重建方式的选择有重要价值,但在不同的患者人群中,仍应结合临床特征和冠状动脉病变特点选择恰当的血运重建术。     

Drug-eluting stent supported percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main disease.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the clinical and angiographic outcomes of unselected patients receiving drug-eluting stents for unprotected left main disease. BACKGROUND: The results of several series of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for left main disease in the pre-drug-eluting stent era have arisen concerns on the safety and mid-term efficacy of PCI. METHODS: Consecutive patients with unprotected left main disease were considered eligible for drug-eluting stent supported PCI. The surgical risk score (risk of death within 1 month) of each patient was calculated according to the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) model. RESULTS: One-hundred and one patients with unprotected left main disease underwent PCI. The mean EuroSCORE was 19 +/- 23. Successfully left main stenting was performed in 98 patients (primary success rate 97%). The overall 1-month mortality rate was 9.9%. The 1-month mortality rate was 50% in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) on presentation, and 4.5% in patients without AMI on presentation. The 1-month mortality rate of patients with a risk score <13 was 3%, while it was 21% in patients with a risk score >or=13. At 6 months, the mortality rate of the entire cohort of patients increased to 12.8%, and the one of the non-AMI patients to 7.8%. Survival rate was 86% +/- 4% (mean follow-up 295 +/- 175 days). Target vessel revascularization was performed in 14 patients (16%). The 6-month in-segment restenosis rate was 16%. CONCLUSION: Drug-eluting stent supported PCI may provide early and mid-term outcomes comparable or superior to those expected from coronary artery surgery. (c) 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation vs. minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) in patients with left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis.

The aim of this study was to assess the effects of percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DESs) versus minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) surgery in the management of patients with proximal left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery stenosis. Until recent years, despite the advantages of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) with bare metal stent implantation, such as shorter hospital stays and recovery time, MIDCAB showed better results with regard to the need for repeated intervention in the target vessel than PTCA with proximal LAD lesions. Symptomatic patients (n = 189) were randomly assigned to DES group (n = 119) and MIDCAB group (n = 70). Patients with an isolated high-grade lesion (stenosis of > or = 70% of the luminal diameter) in the proximal LAD coronary artery (from the ostium to the first diagonal branch) were included in this study. During the 6-month follow-up period, 1.7% (n = 2) in the DES group needed repeated revascularization procedures for target lesion revascularization compared with 5.9% (n = 4) in the MIDCAB group (P = 0.196). The rates of death and myocardial infarction were similar in both groups [DES 0.0% (n = 0) vs. MIDCAB 2.9% (n = 2), P = 0.135; DES 1.7% (n = 2) vs. MIDCAB 2.9% (n = 2), P = 0.627; respectively] during 6 months of follow-up. In-hospital length of stay was significantly shorter in the DES group compared with the MIDCAB group (5.8 +/- 2.1 days vs. 8.9 +/- 2.6 days; P = 0.001). DES implantation and MIDCAB surgery showed similar rates of myocardial infarction, the need for repeated revascularization, and death during 6 months of follow-up. However, DES implantation resulted in lower average number of hospital stays and similar postoperative complications.     

Multiple stent fractures at the site of coronary artery bypass insertion

Drug eluting stents have led to a substantial reduction of in‐stent restenosis. Stent fracture (SF) is an important cause for the cases of restenosis which still occur. Sites of increased vessel movement, long stents, and overlapping stents have been observed to be more prone to fracture. We report the case of a patient with multiple drug eluting SFs at the site of coronary artery bypass insertion. The decision to implant stents at the site of bypass insertion should be made carefully. SF should be considered when gaps between previously implanted stents are observed. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

药物洗脱支架与冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗无保护左主干病变的临床疗效对比

目的:评估药物洗脱支架(DES)置入与冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)治疗无保护左主干病变的临床疗效。方法:分析2003-10-2010-09期间行血运重建的282例无保护左主干患者的临床资料,其中接受DES者143例(DES组),接受CABG者139例(CABG组),比较2组住院期和随访期心脑血管不良事件(死亡、非致死性心肌梗死、脑卒中和再次血运重建,即MACCE)的发生情况。结果:DES组手术成功率为100%,住院期间1例发生非致死性心肌梗死,无一例死亡、脑血管意外或需再次血运重建;CABG组手术成功率为95.7%,住院期间有1例发生非致死性急性心肌梗死,无一例需再次血运重建,共有6例死亡;CABG组住院期死亡率明显高于DES组(4.3%∶0,P<0.05),住院期CABG组总MACCE发生率也明显高于DES组(5.0%∶0.7%,P<0.05);随访期平均(17±8)个月,DES组临床心绞痛复发率和再次血运重建率较CABG组有增高趋势(7.8%∶2.7%,7.0%∶1.8%),但差异无统计学意义,其总MACCE发生率显著高于CABG组(14.8%∶7.1%,P<0.05);剔除新发病变及病变进展病例后,2组总MACCE发生率(7.8%∶7.1%)差异无统计学意义。结论:DES治疗无保护左主干病变安全和有效,可以作为CABG的一种替代治疗手段。     

Simultaneous kissing stent technique to treat left main stem bifurcation disease.

BACKGROUND: While several endovascular techniques have been developed for treating arterial bifurcation lesions, there is, as yet, no single, widely accepted technique for treating left main stem (LMS) bifurcation lesions with stents. The simultaneous kissing stent (SCS) technique seems particularly suited for such lesions. The authors describe a consecutive cohort of patients with LMS bifurcation stenosis treated with this technique and present mechanistic insights from a porcine model. METHODS: Thirty consecutive patients with LMS bifurcation stenosis +/- multivessel disease were treated with SCS technique using paclitaxel-eluting stents. The technique involves simultaneous implantation of two stents (LMS-LAD and LMS-Cx) so that the proximal end of both stents lie at the same level in the body of LMS. Symptom status was recorded and follow-up angiography was performed. In addition, four pigs underwent SCS implantation of the LMS and were studied by direct examination, histology, and scanning electron microscopy. RESULTS: The patients' mean age was 63, 26 were elective and 19 were male. Paclitaxel-eluting stents (Taxus, Boston Scientific) were used. There was one in-hospital death in a highly unstable patient. At 6-month follow-up angiography, two patients required target lesion revascularization. At 13 +/- 3 month follow-up, the remaining patients remain well, with no other major adverse cardiac events. The animals all survived with patent stents. SEM demonstrated full re-endothelialization and histology showed a thin but complete neointima covering the stent struts. CONCLUSION: The SCS technique for treating LMS bifurcation disease with paclitaxel-eluting stents is safe and feasible. Medium term clinical and angiographic results are good. An endothelium and a thin neointima cover the metal struts.