Revascularization of unprotected left main coronary artery disease: Strategy selection and systematic risk assessment

Refinement of interventional techniques, adjunctive pharmacological therapy, and the introduction of drug eluting stents have fostered new interest for the percutaneous treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis. Several observational registries, some randomized controlled trials and several meta‐analyses have consistently shown no difference in mortality and myocardial infarction between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery in patients with ULMCA stenosis, but a higher rate of target vessel revascularization in patients treated with PCI. As a consequence, PCI of ULMCA stenosis has been upgraded to class IIa or IIb indication in the current European or American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association practice guidelines. Although these results are promising, they do not still represent enough evidence for extending PCI of ULMCA stenosis to current clinical practice. The EXCEL trial will address the value of PCI in relation to CABG for the treatment of ULMCA stenosis in more than 2000 patients. A major breakthrough of the SYNTAX trial has been the demonstration of an interaction between the coronary complexity and the revascularization strategy, suggesting that optimal risk stratification is a key element when deciding the best strategy of revascularization in this high‐risk group of patients. Multidisciplinary team approach remains essential to provide a balanced information to the patient and to offer the beast treatment option. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

无保护左主干病变血运重建的临床评价

冠脉旁路移植术为无保护左主干病变的首选治疗。随着经皮冠脉介入治疗技术的进步,在有选择的无保护左主干患者中,PCI与CABG的疗效相当。本文对无保护左主干病变几种血运重建方法进行综述。     

左心室收缩功能正常的老年冠心病患者无保护左主干病变PCI治疗预后的影响因素

目的 探讨左心室收缩功能正常（左心室射血分数≥40％）的老年冠状动脉粥样硬化性心脏病（冠心病）患者无保护左主干（unprotected left main,ULM）病变经皮冠状动脉介入（percutaneous coronary intervention,PCI）治疗预后的影响因素.方法 回顾性分析2009年1月至2011年12月在广西壮族自治区人民医院因ULM接受PCI治疗的左心室收缩功能正常的患者112例的临床资料和冠状动脉造影结果.根据患者的情况分为非老年组（年龄＜60岁）和老年组（≥60岁）,比较两组间的基线资料和冠状动脉造影结果.应用多因素回归分析法观察年龄对ULM介入治疗结果的预测价值.结果 总计入选符合条件的患者112例,其中非老年组42例和老年组70例.老年组糖尿病、高脂血症、吸烟史、既往PCI治疗、主要心脑血管不良事件（MACCE）、术后心肌梗死发生率明显高于非老年组,差异有统计学意义（分别为42.9％ vs.21.1％,P=0.021;40％ vs.11.9％,P=0.040; 28.6％ vs.9.5％,P=0.017;18.6％ vs.4.8％,P=0.038;48.6％ vs.23.8％,P=0.009;22.9％ vs.0％,P=0.001）.Logistics回归分析得出女性、年龄、吸烟史、合并多支血管病变、远端或分叉病变均为主要心脑血管不良事件的独立预测因素.结论 左心室收缩功能正常的患者,其年龄因素是ULM介入治疗预后不良的强力预测因素.     

Percutaneous revascularization of left main

Refinement of interventional techniques, adjunctive pharmacological therapy, and the introduction of drug‐eluting stents have fostered new interest for the percutaneous treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis. Several observational registries, some randomized trials and several meta‐analyses have consistently shown no difference in mortality and myocardial infarction between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery in patients with ULMCA stenosis, but a higher rate of target vessel revascularization in patients treated with PCI. As a consequence, PCI of ULMCA stenosis has been upgraded to class IIa or IIb indication in the current European or American practice guidelines. However, several critical issues should be properly addressed when pursuing a percutaneous strategy for the treatment of ULMCA stenosis, such as the use of IVUS for procedural guidance, assessment of disease location, optimal technique for distal ULMCA stenosis, risk of stent thrombosis, optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy, and the most appropriate strategy for post‐procedure follow up. Multidisciplinary team approach remains essential to provide a balanced information to the patient and to offer the beast treatment option. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Percutaneous coronary intervention of unprotected left main coronary artery disease

Data have emerged demonstrating the safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the unprotected left main (ULM) artery. The 2009 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions focused guidelines for PCI no longer state that ULM PCI is contraindicated in patients with anatomic conditions that are associated with a low risk of procedural complications and clinical conditions that predict an increased risk of adverse surgical outcomes. ULM PCI should be performed by operators with experience in the management of the anatomic complexities of left main and multivessel disease, specifically in issues relating to bifurcation disease, calcification, and hemodynamic support. Patients with ostial or shaft disease have lower risk of restenosis compared with distal bifurcation disease. Drug‐eluting stents (DES) should be used whenever possible as they reduce clinical restenosis. Intravascular ultrasound is an integral component of the procedure as it provides accurate assessment of lesion severity and can confirm optimal stent expansion and apposition. Compliance with dual antiplatelet therapy for at least 12 months is essential if DES are used. A collaborative, multidisciplinary approach with a “Heart Team” represented by a cardiac surgeon, interventional cardiologist, and non‐invasive cardiologist may optimize patient education and objective decision making when obtaining informed consent. Application of clinical and angiographic variables into risk models facilitates appropriate patient selection. Randomized clinical trials will address unanswered issues and help build consensus between cardiology and surgical societies to inform clinical decision making and optimize the outcomes for patients with ULM coronary artery disease. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, 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。     

Early and long‐term results of percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main trifurcation disease

Objectives: We aimed to conduct a retrospective cohort study focusing on our 5‐year experience in the percutaneous treatment of unprotected left main (ULM) trifurcation disease. Background: Percutaneous treatment of ULM trifurcation remains a challenging and rare procedure for most interventional cardiologists. Moreover, data on long‐term outcomes are lacking. Methods: We retrieved all patients with ULM trifurcation disease treated percutaneously at our Institution since 2002, and adjudicated baseline, procedural, and outcome data. The primary end point was the long‐term rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE, i.e., cardiac death, myocardial infarction, bypass surgery, or target vessel revascularization). Results: A total of 27 patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation for ULM trifurcation disease, with 14 (52%) cases of true trifurcations, i.e., with concomitant significant stenoses of the distal ULM/ostial left anterior descending plus ostial ramus intermedius and ostial circumflex. Bare‐metal stents were implanted in 8 (29%) patients and drug‐eluting stents (DES) in 26 (96%), with a main branch stent only strategy in 11 (40%), T stenting in 9 (33%), and V stenting in 6 (27%). Procedural and clinical success occurred in 26 (96%), with one postprocedural death. Angiographic follow‐up was obtained in 22 patients (81%), and clinical follow‐up was completed in all subjects after a median of 28 ± 17 months, showing overall MACE in 9 (33%), with cardiac death in 4 (15%), myocardial infarction in 1 (4%), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in 4 (15%), and percutaneous target vessel revascularization in 5 (19%). Definite stent thrombosis was adjudicated in 1 (3%) patient. Treatment of a true trifurcation lesion and recurrence of angina during follow‐up were significantly associated with an increased risk of MACE (P = 0.029 and P = 0.050, respectively). Conclusions: Percutaneous treatment of ULM trifurcation disease is feasible, associated with favorable mid‐term results, and may be considered given its low invasiveness in patients at high surgical risk or with multiple comorbidities. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

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.     

Coronary revascularization for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease: Evidence,guidelines, and judgment! making clinical decisions in 2009

The current clinical practice guidelines categorize the use of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery for revascularization of patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCAD) as a class IA recommendation while it categorize the use of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) as a class III recommendation. The evidence underlying these recommendations is weak and out dated. The purpose of this review is to critically reevaluate current state‐of‐the‐art with respect to revascularization of patients with ULMCAD who are acceptable surgical candidates. In doing so we will highlight the divergence between practice guidelines and patient‐centered clinical decision‐making; critically appraise the “evidence” underlying the current practice guidelines; review the emerging data regarding utility of CABG versus PCI in these patients; and finally discuss the elements of a contemporary approach to clinical decision‐making in light of the current state of knowledge. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

左主干及三支病变经皮冠状动脉介入与冠状动脉搭桥术后 随访对比研究

［摘要］目的：总结比较冠心病（左主干和三支病变）患者接受经皮冠状动脉介入（PCI）或冠状动脉旁路移植术（CABG或者OPCAB）后的治疗效果。方法：回顾性连续分析我院2009年9月到2012年9月期间行PCI或者CABG的左主干及三支病变患者,比较分析在住院期间、出院后12个月出院后终末事件,包括死亡、心肌梗死、脑血管事件、心绞痛复发和再次介入。结果：总共有1292名患者被纳入,分PCI组626名,CABG组666名;随访12个月,90％的PCI和97％的CABG患者纳入。死亡、心肌梗死或中风在CABG患者中都较PCI患者低（P =0.01）。结论：在三支和/或左主干病变中,CABG在减少不良心脑血管事件上优于PCI;在12个月中,CABG对三支和/或左主干病变的治疗效果也优于PCI。但还需要更长期的研究。     

Recovery of left ventricular function after percutaneous revascularization of a left main chronic total occlusion

Surgical revascularization of left main and/or three‐vessel coronary artery disease (CAD) is associated with improved survival in patients with left ventricular dysfunction when compared to medical therapy and can result in improved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) [ 1 ]. Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is equivalent to surgery regarding short and intermediate term mortality, and left main PCI has emerged as a safe and effective alternate to surgical revascularization [ 2 ]. However, outcomes of unprotected left main PCI in patients with severely depressed LVEF have not been examined. We report a patient with left main chronic total occlusion, multivessel CAD, and dilated cardiomyopathy, in whom complete revascularization via PCI resulted in decreased left ventricular size and improved LVEF. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Percutaneous left main coronary artery stent for acute myocardial ischemia after repaired ALCAPA

Percutaneous coronary artery stent angioplasty is rare in the pediatric population but can be a life‐saving by rapidly reestablishing flow to an obstructed coronary artery. It is a technically challenging and high‐risk procedure in infants and further limited by the need for future surgical intervention. We report of an infant with anomalous left coronary artery from the pulmonary artery who underwent acutely successful surgical reimplantation of the left coronary artery onto the ascending aorta. One month later, she developed acute myocardial ischemia and emergent catheterization diagnosed near‐total occlusion of the left coronary artery. We implanted a 2.5 mm coronary stent in the left main coronary artery with reestablishment of flow. The patient's left ventricular systolic function recovered within 4 weeks and repeat angiography 3 months later showed complete normalization of the entire left coronary artery system. The patient weighed 3 kg and was < 6 weeks of age at the time of stent implantation which to our knowledge is the smallest and youngest reported patient to undergo coronary stent angioplasty. This case supports the feasibility of this procedure in infants as a temporizing solution to hemodynamic instability from myocardial ischemia due to coronary artery stenosis. The left ventricular systolic function remained normal at 7 months after stent placement and the patient was clinically well from a cardiac perspective. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Ten-year outcomes of early generation sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with left main coronary artery disease

To compare 10-year outcomes after implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) versus paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) for left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. Very long-term outcome data of patients with LMCA disease treated with drug-eluting stents (DES) have not been well described. In 10-year extended follow-up of the MAINCOMPARE registry, we evaluated 778 patients with unprotected LMCA stenosis who were treated with SES (n = 607) or PES (n = 171) between January 2000 and June 2006. The primary composite outcome (a composite of death, myocardial infarction [MI] or target-vessel revascularization [TVR]) was compared with an inverse-probability-of-treatment-weighting (IPTW) adjustment. Clinical events have linearly accumulated over 10 years. At 10 years, there were no significant differences between SES and PES in the observed rates of the primary composite outcome (42.0% vs. 47.4%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66–1.10), and definite stent thrombosis (ST) (1.9% vs. 1.8%; HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.28–3.64). In the IPTW-adjusted analyses, there were no significant differences between SES and PES in the risks for the primary composite outcome (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.65–1.14) or definite ST (adjusted HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.29–3.90). In patients who underwent DES implantation, high overall adverse clinical event rates (with a linearly increasing event rate over time) were observed during extended follow-up. At 10 years, there were no measurable differences in outcomes between patients treated with SES vs. PES for LMCA disease. The incidence of stent thrombosis was quite low and comparable between the groups.     

Comparative long-term efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stent versus coronary artery bypass grafting in ostial left main coronary artery disease: analysis of the MAIN-COMPARE registry

Background : To date, drug‐eluting stent (DES) implantation has not been compared with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for ostial left main coronary artery (LMCA) lesions. Methods : Of the 263 patients in the MAIN‐COMPARE registry with ostial LMCA stenosis, 123 were treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with DES and 140 with CABG. We compared their 5‐year overall survival, composite outcomes of death, Q‐wave myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke, and target vessel revascularization (TVR) rates. Results : Unadjusted analysis showed no significant differences between CABG and DES in overall survival rates (95% confidence interval (CI) for hazard ratio (HR): 0.44 to 1.77, P = 0.71), composite outcomes (death, Q‐wave MI, or stroke)‐free survival rates (95% CI for HR: 0.41–1.63, P = 0.56), and TVR‐free survival rates (95% CI for HR: 0.79–5.03, P = 0.14). Multivariate adjusted Cox regression analysis also showed no significant between‐group differences in TVR (95% CI for HR: 0.52–3.79, P = 0.49), death (95% CI for HR: 0.79–2.82, P = 0.22) and the composite of death, Q‐wave MI, or stroke (95% CI for HR: 0.65–2.57, P = 0.46). These results were sustained after propensity score adjustment and propensity score matching analysis. Conclusions : DES implantation for ostial LMCA lesions showed similar 5‐year outcomes of death, major adverse events, and TVR compared with CABG. Although meticulous adjustments decreased baseline difference between the two treatments, the absence of statistical significance could be attributable to the size of the study sample and hidden bias. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.