Outcome of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Patients With Intermediate SYNTAX II Score

Patients with intermediate SYNTAX II score have been representing a confusion in our daily practice for interventional cardiologists whether to treat them by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using second generation drug eluting stents or by coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We enrolled 214 consecutive patients with intermediate SYNTAX II score to undergo revascularization (109 patients underwent PCI and 105 patients underwent CABG) after Heart Team discussion. We compared both procedures with respect to the primary composite end point of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization or stroke) at 40 months post procedure. At 40 months post revascularization procedure, the primary end-point occurred in 22 patients and 15 patients in the PCI and CABG groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.87-3.14; P = 0.13). No significant differences were detected between both groups regarding the composite incidence of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and stroke. CABG significantly provided better quality of life than PCI for patients with intermediate SYNTAX II score. In patients with intermediate SYNTAX II score, there was no statistically significant difference between the PCI using second generation drug eluting stents and CABG with respect to the incidence of MACCE at 40 months post revascularization procedure.     

Mortality 10 Years After Percutaneous or Surgical Revascularization in Patients With Total Coronary Artery Occlusions

BackgroundThe long-term clinical benefit after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with total occlusions (TOs) and complex coronary artery disease has not yet been clarified.ObjectivesThe objective of this analysis was to assess 10-year all-cause mortality in patients with TOs undergoing PCI or CABG.MethodsThis is a subanalysis of patients with at least 1 TO in the SYNTAXES (Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery Extended Survival) study, which investigated 10-year all-cause mortality in the SYNTAX (Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) trial, beyond its original 5-year follow-up. Patients with TOs were further stratified according to the status of TO recanalization or revascularization.ResultsOf 1,800 randomized patients to the PCI or CABG arm, 460 patients had at least 1 lesion of TO. In patients with TOs, the status of TO recanalization or revascularization was not associated with 10-year all-cause mortality, irrespective of the assigned treatment (PCI arm: 29.9% vs. 29.4%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.992; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.474 to 2.075; p = 0.982; and CABG arm: 28.0% vs. 21.4%; adjusted HR: 0.656; 95% CI: 0.281 to 1.533; p = 0.330). When TOs existed in left main and/or left anterior descending artery, the status of TO recanalization or revascularization did not have an impact on the mortality (34.5% vs. 26.9%; adjusted HR: 0.896; 95% CI: 0.314 to 2.555; p = 0.837).ConclusionsAt 10-year follow-up, the status of TO recanalization or revascularization did not affect mortality, irrespective of the assigned treatment and location of TOs. The present study might support contemporary practice among high-volume chronic TO-PCI centers where recanalization is primarily offered to patients for the management of angina refractory to medical therapy when myocardial viability is confirmed. (Synergy Between PCI With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery: SYNTAX Extended Survival [SYNTAXES]; NCT03417050; SYNTAX Study: TAXUS Drug-Eluting Stent Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for the Treatment of Narrowed Arteries [SYNTAX]; NCT00114972)     

Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Complex Coronary Artery Disease

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare, in a cohort of patients with complex coronary artery disease (CAD) and severe aortic stenosis (AS), the clinical outcomes associated with transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) (plus percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) (plus coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]).BackgroundPatients with complex CAD were excluded from the main randomized trials comparing TAVR with SAVR, and no data exist comparing TAVR + PCI vs SAVR + CABG in such patients.MethodsA multicenter study was conducted including consecutive patients with severe AS and complex CAD (SYNTAX [Synergy Between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery] score >22 or unprotected left main disease). A 1:1 propensity-matched analysis was performed to account for unbalanced covariates. The rates of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), including all-cause mortality, nonprocedural myocardial infarction, need for new coronary revascularization, and stroke, were evaluated.ResultsA total of 800 patients (598 undergoing SAVR + CABG and 202 undergoing transfemoral TAVR + PCI) were included, and after propensity matching, a total of 156 pairs of patients were generated. After a median follow-up period of 3 years (interquartile range: 1-6 years), there were no significant differences between groups for MACCE (HR for transfemoral TAVR vs SAVR: 1.33; 95% CI: 0.89-1.98), all-cause mortality (HR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.81-1.94), myocardial infarction (HR: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.41-3.27), and stroke (HR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.13-1.32), but there was a higher rate of new coronary revascularization in the TAVR + PCI group (HR: 5.38; 95% CI: 1.73-16.7).ConclusionsIn patients with severe AS and complex CAD, TAVR + PCI and SAVR + CABG were associated with similar rates of MACCE after a median follow-up period of 3 years, but TAVR + PCI recipients exhibited a higher risk for repeat coronary revascularization. Future trials are warranted.     

Validation of Scoring Systems That Predict Outcomes in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgery

Several risk stratification scores, based on angiographic or clinical parameters, have been developed to evaluate outcomes in patients with left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) who undergo coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This study aims to validate the predictive ability of different risk scoring systems with regard to long-term outcomes after CABG.This single-center study retrospectively re-evaluated the Synergy Between PCI with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score; EuroSCORE; age, creatinine, and ejection fraction (ACEF) score; modified ACEF score; clinical SYNTAX; logistic clinical SYNTAX score (logistic CSS); and Parsonnet scores for 305 patients with LMCAD who underwent CABG. The endpoints were 5-year rate of all-cause death and major adverse cardio-cerebral events (MACCEs), including cardiovascular (CV) death, myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke and target vessel revascularization (TVR).Compared with the SYNTAX score, other scores were significantly higher in discriminative ability for all-cause death (SYNTAX vs others: P < 0.01). The EuroSCORE ≥6 showed significant outcome difference on all-cause death, CV death, MI, and MACCE (P < .01). Multivariate analysis indicated the SYNTAX score was a non-significant predictor for different outcomes. Adjusted multivariate analysis revealed that the EuroSCORE was the strongest predictor of all-cause death (hazard ratio[HR]: 1.17; P < 0.001), CV death (HR: 1.16; P < 0.001), and MACCE (HR: 1.09; P = 0.01). The ACEF score and logistic CSS were predictive factors for TVR (HR: 0.25, P = 0.03; HR: 0.85, P = 0.01).The EuroSCORE scoring system most accurately predicts all-cause death, CV death, and MACCE over 5 years, whereas low ACEF score and logistic CSS are independently associated with TVR over the 5-year period following CABG in patients with LMCAD undergoing CABG.     

Comparison of one-year outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease and acute coronary syndromes (from the CUSTOMIZE Registry)

Uncertainty surrounds the optimal revascularization strategy for patients with left main coronary artery disease presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACSs), and adequately sized specific comparisons of percutaneous and surgical revascularization in this scenario are lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of 1-year major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) in patients with left main coronary artery disease and ACS treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and drug-eluting stent implantation or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). A total of 583 patients were included. At 1 year, MACEs were significantly higher in patients treated with PCI (n = 222) compared to those treated with CABG (n = 361, 14.4% vs 5.3%, p <0.001), driven by a higher rate of target lesion revascularization (8.1% vs 1.7%, p = 0.001). This finding was consistent after statistical adjustment for MACEs (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2 to 5.9, p = 0.01) and target lesion revascularization (adjusted HR 8.0, 95% CI 2.2 to 28.7, p = 0.001). No statistically significant differences between PCI and CABG were noted for death (adjusted HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.4 to 3.0, p = 0.81) and myocardial infarction (adjusted HR 4.8, 95% CI 0.3 to 68.6, p = 0.25). No interaction between clinical presentation (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or unstable angina/non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction) and treatment (PCI or CABG) was observed (p for interaction = 0.68). In conclusion, in patients with left main coronary artery disease and ACS, PCI is associated with similar safety compared to CABG but higher risk of MACEs driven by increased risk of repeat revascularization.     

10-Year Follow-Up After Revascularization in Elderly Patients With Complex Coronary Artery Disease

BackgroundThe optimal revascularization strategy for the elderly with complex coronary artery disease remains unclear.ObjectivesThe goal of this study was to investigate 10-year all-cause mortality, life expectancy, 5-year major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE), and 5-year quality of life (QOL) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) in elderly individuals (>70 years old) with 3-vessel disease (3VD) and/or left main disease (LMD).MethodsIn the present pre-specified analysis on age of the SYNTAX Extended Survival study, 10-year all-cause death and 5-year MACCE were compared with Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards models among elderly or nonelderly patients. Life expectancy was estimated by restricted mean survival time within 10 years, and QOL status according to the Seattle Angina Questionnaire up to 5 years was assessed by linear mixed-effects models.ResultsAmong 1,800 randomized patients, 575 patients (31.9%) were elderly. Ten-year mortality did not differ significantly between PCI and CABG in elderly (44.1% vs. 41.1%; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84 to 1.40) and nonelderly patients (21.1% vs. 16.6%; HR: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.69; p_interaction = 0.332). Among elderly patients, 5-year MACCE was comparable between PCI and CABG (39.4% vs. 35.1%; HR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.56), whereas it was significantly higher in PCI over CABG among nonelderly patients (36.3% vs. 23.0%; HR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.36 to 2.10; p_interaction = 0.043). There were no significant difference in life expectancy (mean difference: 0.2 years in favor of CABG; 95% CI: ?0.4 to 0.7) and 5-year QOL status between PCI and CABG among elderly patients.ConclusionsElderly patients with 3VD and/or LMD had comparable 10-year all-cause death, life expectancy, 5-year MACCE, and 5-year QOL status irrespective of revascularization mode. (Synergy Between PCI With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery: SYNTAX Extended Survival [SYNTAXES]; NCT03417050) (SYNTAX Study: TAXUS Drug-Eluting Stent Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for the Treatment of Narrowed Arteries [SYNTAX]; NCT00114972)     

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis

Background

The present study performed a meta-analysis of randomized and prospective trials to compare the outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stents versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) for unprotected left main coronary artery (UPLM) stenosis.

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.     

Percutaneous coronary intervention of unprotected left main disease: Five-year outcome of a single-center registry

Introduction and AimsPercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is increasingly used as a treatment option for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) lesions. We aimed to evaluate the long-term outcome of patients undergoing ULMCA PCI.Methods and ResultsWe retrospectively analyzed 95 consecutive patients (median EuroSCORE I 2.9 [IQR 1.4;6.1]) who underwent ULMCA PCI between 1999 and 2006, included in a single-center prospective registry. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) defined as all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at five years. Forty patients (42.1%) were treated in the setting of acute coronary syndrome and 81 patients (85%) had at least one additional significant lesion (SYNTAX score 24.2±11.8). Single ULMCA PCI was performed in 33% (81.1% with drug-eluting stents) and complete functional revascularization was achieved in 79% of the patients. During the observation period, 20 patients died (21.1%), 6 (6.3%) had MI and 11 (11.6%) had TLR (total combined MACE 28.4%). Independent predictors of MACE were previous MI (HR 2.9 95% CI 1.23–6.92; p=0.015), hypertension (HR 5.7 95% CI 1.86–17.47; p=0.002) and the EuroSCORE I (HR 1.1 95% CI 1.03–1.12; p=0.001). Drug-eluting stent implantation was associated with a significantly lower MACE rate, even after propensity score adjustment (AUC=0.84; HR [corrected] 0.1; 95% CI 0.04–0.26; p<0.001).ConclusionsUnprotected left main percutaneous coronary intervention, particularly using drug-eluting stents, can be considered a valid alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting, especially in high-risk surgical patients and with favorable anatomic features.     

Meta-analysis Comparing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients With Multivessel or Left Main Disease

Outcomes of patients presenting with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) with multivessel coronary disease (MVD) and/or unprotected left main coronary artery disease (CAD) revascularized with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is not well defined. MEDLINE/PubMed and EMBASE/Ovid were queried for studies that investigated PCI vs CABG in this disease subset. The primary outcome was major cardiac adverse events (MACE) at 30 days and long-term follow-up (3-5 years). The final analysis included 9 studies with a total of 9299 patients. No significant difference was observed between PCI and CABG in 30 days MACE (risk ratio [RR] 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-2.39, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke. A meta-regression analysis revealed patients with a history of PCI had higher risk of MACE with PCI as compared with CABG. At long-term follow-up, PCI compared with CABG was associated with higher risk of MACE (RR 1.52; 95% CI 1.28-1.81), myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization, while no difference was observed in the risk of stroke and all-cause mortality. In patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD or unprotected left main CAD, no differences were observed in the clinical outcomes between PCI and CABG at 30 days follow-up. With long-term follow-up, PCI was associated with a higher risk of MACE.     

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.     

Comparison of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting and Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease and Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BackgroundTreatment of left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) with either percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains controversial. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the optimal choice of therapy when treating LMCAD in patients with CKD.MethodWe performed an electronic database search of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for all studies that compared PCI with CABG when treating LMCAD in the setting of CKD. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) were the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction (MI), cerebrovascular events, all-cause mortality, and repeat revascularization.ResultsOur analysis included 5 studies (2 randomized controlled trial and 3 retrospective) representing a total of 1212 patients. Mean follow up was 3.4 ± 1.3 years. Our study demonstrated a significant reduction in MACCE for patients treated with CABG compared with PCI (odd ratio [OR] 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55–0.95, P = 0.02, I² = 0%). We also found a significant reduction in both MI (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.34–0.87; P = 0.01; I² = 0%) and repeat revascularization (OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.10–0.51; P < 0.001, I² = 63%) in the CABG group. However, CABG was associated with increased risks of cerebrovascular disease events compared with PCI (OR 2.04; 95% CI 1.02–4.08; P = 0.04, I² = 0%).ConclusionIn patients with CKD requiring LMCAD intervention, CABG is associated with a lower risk of MACCE, MI, and repeat revascularization, however it was associated with an increased risk of cerebrovascular accidents when compared to patients who received PCI therapy. Further RCTs with sufficient power are required to confirm these findings.     

合并射血分数减低的复杂冠状动脉病变患者接受不同血运重建术疗效分析

目的探讨冠状动脉左主干(LM)病变和(或)三支血管病变的冠心病患者,在同时合并射血分数减低的心力衰竭(HFrEF)情况下,接受不同血运重建策略治疗对近期及远期预后的影响。方法选取2009年1月至2018年1月就诊于首都医科大学附属北京安贞医院合并HFrEF并成功行血运重建治疗的LM病变和(或)三支病变冠心病患者进行病例注册分析。根据纳入及排除标准最终入选患者902例,其中接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)置入药物洗脱支架228例(PCI组),接受冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)治疗674例(CABG组)。根据术后平均3.1年随访资料对两组患者主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE)进行比较,同时分析左心功能变化情况。结果经单因素回归分析后,将差异具有统计学意义的因素(吸烟史、陈旧性前壁心肌梗死病史、既往PCI史、既往CABG史、SYNTAX评分)纳入Cox多因素回归分析,结果显示:成功进行血运重建治疗后1年CABG组患者的MACCE发生率高于PCI组(17.66%比14.04%,HR 1.362,95%CI 1.211~2.070,P<0.010)。对MACCE单个事件比较显示,CABG组患者的全因死亡率高于PCI组(12.61%比6.14%,HR 2.134,95%CI 1.832~3.182,P<0.010),而再次血运重建率较低(2.97%比4.82%,HR 0.696,95%CI 0.518~0.922,P=0.026);两组患者卒中及因心力衰竭入院事件发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。经多因素回归分析校正混杂因素,术后3年随访结果显示:两组患者的MACCE发生率相似,同时在单独事件全因死亡风险、心原性死亡风险方面差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。相较于PCI组,CABG组具有较高的卒中发生率(5.93%比3.07%,HR 1.894,95%CI 1.528~2.673,P=0.014)和较低的再次血运重建率(8.31%比13.16%,HR 0.558,95%CI 0.362~0.714,P<0.010)。并依据SYNTAX评分分值分为SYNTAX评分低分(≤22分)、SYNTAX评分中分(23~32分)、SYNTAX评分高分(≥33分),单因素回归分析筛选各组间具有统计学差异的因素纳入Cox多因素回归分析,经校正混杂因素后术后3年随访结果显示,对于SYNTAX评分低分患者,CABG组心原性死亡风险高于PCI组(HR 1.253,95%CI 0.748~2.003,P=0.048),两组全因死亡风险相似;而对于SYNTAX评分高分患者,CABG组的全因死亡事件、心原性死亡发生率均略低于PCI组,但差异均无统计学意义(HR 0.796,95%CI 0.318~1.274,P=0.057;HR 0.941,95%CI 0.295~1.681,P=0.623)。结论合并HFrEF的复杂冠状动脉病变的冠心病患者接受PCI的远期预后并不劣于接受CABG治疗,对于存在左心功能障碍的冠心病患者,PCI也可作为血运重建治疗策略。     

Impact of SYNTAX Score on 10-Year Outcomes After Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate the long-term impact of SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score (SS) on differential outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease.BackgroundThe very long term prognostic effect of SS on mortality and major cardiovascular events after LMCA revascularization is still undetermined.MethodsIn the MAIN-COMPARE (Ten-Year Outcomes of Stents Versus Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) registry, patients with baseline SS measurements were analyzed. The 10-year rates of all-cause mortality, the composite of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or stroke, and target vessel revascularization after PCI or CABG were compared according to baseline SS.ResultsAmong 1,580 patients with baseline SS, 547 patients (34.6%) had low SS (≤22), 350 (22.2%) had intermediate SS (23 to 32), and 683 (43.2%) had high SS (≥33). In patients with low to intermediate SS, the adjusted 10-year risks for death and serious composite outcome were similar between the PCI group and the CABG group. However, in patients with high SS, PCI with stenting, compared with CABG, was associated with a higher risk for death (hazard ratio: 1.39; 95% confidence interval: 1.00 to 1.92; p = 0.048) and serious composite outcome (hazard ratio: 1.27; 95% confidence interval: 0.94 to 1.74; p = 0.123). In each revascularization group, conventional tertiles of SS had a differential prognostic impact on 10-year clinical outcomes in the PCI arm but not in the CABG arm.ConclusionsIn this 10-year extended follow-up of patients undergoing LMCA revascularization, CABG showed a clear prognostic benefit over PCI in patients with high anatomic complexity measured by SS at baseline. The discriminative capacity of SS on long-term outcomes was relevant in the PCI group but not in the CABG group. (Ten-Year Outcomes of Stents Versus Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease [MAIN-COMPARE]; NCT02791412)     

Bypass Surgery or Stenting for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Diabetes

Background

The randomized EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trial reported a similar rate of the 3-year composite primary endpoint of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke in patients with left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) and site-assessed low or intermediate SYNTAX scores treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Whether these results are consistent in high-risk patients with diabetes, who have fared relatively better with CABG in most prior trials, is unknown.

Validating the EXCEL hypothesis: A propensity score matched 3‐year comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft in left main patients with SYNTAX score ≤32

Objectives : The aim of this study is to verify the study hypothesis of the EXCEL trial by comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) in an EXCEL‐like population of patients. Background : The upcoming EXCEL trial will test the hypothesis that left main patients with SYNTAX score ≤32 experience similar rates of 3‐year death, myocardial infarction (MI), or cerebrovascular accidents (CVA) following revascularization by PCI or CABG. Methods : We compared the 3‐year rates of death/MI/CVA and death/MI/CVA/target vessel revascularization (MACCE) in 556 patients with left main disease and SYNTAX score ≤32 undergoing PCI (n = 285) or CABG (n = 271). To account for confounders, outcome parameters underwent extensive statistical adjustment. Results : The unadjusted incidence of death/MI/CVA was similar between PCI and CABG (12.7% vs. 8.4%, P = 0.892), while MACCE were higher in the PCI group compared to the CABG group (27.0% vs. 11.8%, P < 0.001). After propensity score matching, PCI was not associated with a significant increase in the rate of death/MI/CVA (11.8% vs. 10.7%, P = 0.948), while MACCE were more frequently noted among patients treated with PCI (28.8% vs. 14.1%, P = 0.002). Adjustment by means of SYNTAX score and EUROSCORE, covariates with and without propensity score, and propensity score alone did not change significantly these findings. Conclusions : In an EXCEL‐like cohort of patients with left main disease, there seems to be a clinical equipoise between PCI and CABG in terms of death/MI/CVA. However, even in patients with SYNTAX score ≤32, CABG is superior to PCI when target vessel revascularization is included in the combined endpoint. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Lessons from the SYNTAX trial

Despite the fact that CABG is the standard of care for patients with multivessel coronary arteries and/or left main stem stenosis, PCI has become a rival to CABG in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease or left main disease. However, the need for repeat revascularization, in-stent stenosis and thrombosis remain the achilis heal of PCI. SYNTAX trial randomized patients with left main disease and/or three-vessel disease to PCI with TAXus stent or CABG with the concept that PCI is not inferior to CABG. At 1 and 2 years follow up, MACCE was significantly increased in PCI patients mainly attributed to increased rate of repeat revascularization; however, stroke was significantly more with CABG. The composite safety endpoint of death/stroke/MI was comparable between the 2 groups. Therefore the criterion for non-inferiority was not met. What we learn from SYNTAX is that multi disciplinary team approach should be the standard of care when recommending treatment in more complex coronary artery disease. SYNTAX makes interventionists and surgeons come together, it may set the benchmark for MVD revascularization. PCI and CABG should be considered complementary rather than competitive revascularization strategies. There is no substitute for sound clinical judgment that takes into account the patient’s overall clinical profile, functionality, co-morbidities, as well as the patient’s coronary anatomy. The SYNTAX Score should be utilized to decide on treatment of patients with LM/MVD. Patients with low and intermediate score can be treated with PCI or CABG with equal results. Those with high score do better with CABG. SYNTAX trial showed that 66% of patients with 3VD or LMD are still best treated with CABG. In the remaining 1/3 of patients with low syntax score, PCI may be considered as an alternative to surgery. Finally, medical treatment should be optimized in patients going for CABG.     

Outcomes After Coronary Stenting or Bypass Surgery for Men and Women With Unprotected Left Main Disease: The EXCEL Trial

Objectives

The aim of the present study was to assess outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) according to sex in a large randomized trial of patients with unprotected left main disease.

SYNTAX积分对经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的临床疗效与预测作用研究

目的:研究SYNTAX积分、临床SYNTAX积分及Global Risk Classification(GRC)对左主干/3支病变的冠心病患者,经皮冠状动脉介入治疗术后临床的预测作用,并评价三种积分系统的预测价值。方法:回顾性分析自2007年1月31日至2008年12月31日,北京安贞医院心内科经皮冠状动脉介入治疗术(percutaneous coronary intervention,PCI)置入Cypher select药物洗脱支架的左主干/3支病变的冠心病患者共190例。根据冠状动脉造影结果计算三种积分系统,并根据3分位数值分别分为低分、中分及高分组。通过门诊或电话随访PCI术后患者的主要不良心脑血管事件(major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events,MACCE),包括死亡、非致命性心肌梗死、再次血运重建、脑血管事件发生率。分别评价三种积分系统对患者术后临床预后的预测作用,评价三者的预测能力。结果:190例患者中,失访10例,失访率5.3%,随访中位数为29.4个月,29例观察到MACCE,MACCE发生率18.5%。SYNTAX积分低分(≤20.5)、中分(21.0~31.0)及高分组(≥31.5)的主要MACCE发生率分别为9.1%、16.2%及30.9%。临床SYNTAX评分低分(≤19.5)、中分(19.6~29.1)及高分组(≥29.2)的主要MACCE率分别为14.9%、9.8%及30.6%。GRC低、中、高分组的MACCE发生率分别为17.8%、14.2%及46.1%,单因素及多因素分析结果均显示三种积分系统是MACCE的独立预测因子。ROC曲线分析结果 SYNTAX积分AUC=0.667(95%CI=0.564~0.770,P=0.004),临床SYNTAX积分AUC=0.636(95%CI=0.519~0.753,P=0.020),GRC预测PCI术后MACCE的能力(AUROC=0.617,95%CI=0.512~0.736,P=0.046),三者都显示对MACCE有预测价值。结论:三种积分系统对冠状动脉左主干/3支病变患者行PCI治疗后的MACCE均有预测作用,可作为MACCE的独立预测因子。     

Comparison of Rotational with Orbital Atherectomy During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Coronary Artery Calcification: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BackgroundPercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) outcomes for patients with significant calcification have been consistently inferior compared to patients without significant calcification. Procedural success and long-term outcomes after PCI have been worse in patients with severe coronary calcium.ObjectiveA Bayesian meta-analysis of outcomes comparing rotational atherectomy (RA) with orbital atherectomy (OA) was performed.MethodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched through 30th November 2018 and identified 4 observational studies.ResultsThe primary end-point, Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) composing of death, MI and stroke at 1 year was more likely with RA (OR = 1.61; 95% CI: 1.11–2.33; p = 0.01) as compared to OA. The driver of the difference in MACE between the two groups was a statistically significant difference in mortality favoring OA (OR = 4.65; 95% CI: 1.36–15.87; p = 0.01). Peri-procedural MI, the other component of the primary end-point was 1.3 times more likely in the RA arm (OR = 1.35; 95% CI 0.95–1.92; p-0.09) and was not statistically different between the groups. The odds of a vascular complication were not different in the two groups (OR = 1.26; 95% CI: 0.73–2.17; p = 0.41).In an adjusted Bayesian analysis, mortality (OR = 3.69; 95% CI: 0.30–38.51), MACE (OR = 1.68; 95% CI: 0.55–5.49), MI (OR = 1.42; 95% CI: 0.50–4.29) and dissections/perforations (OR = 0.38; 95% CI: 0.10–1.38) were not different in RA and OA groups.ConclusionOur study is the first published Bayesian meta-analysis comparing MACE and peri-procedural outcomes in RA compared to OA. These findings lay the foundation for a randomized comparison between the two competing technologies.