糖尿病多支冠状动脉病变患者不同血管重建疗效的比较

目的:评价对糖尿病多支冠状动脉病变患者的裸支架(BMS)置入、药物洗脱支架(DES)置入和冠状动脉搭桥手术(CABG)3种不同血管重建的疗效。方法:选择接受血管重建治疗的糖尿病伴多支冠状动脉病变患者427例,比较其BMS、DES和CABG不同治疗方法的疗效和随访2年的临床结果。结果:BMS、DES和CABG3组间住院时期的不良心脑血管事件(MACCE)发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义。2年随访结果中,BMS组、DES组再次血管重建率分别为17.6%、10.4%,均显著高于CABG组的1.9%(P<0.01);BMS组的总MACCE发生率为23.1%,显著高于CABG组的10.7%(P<0.01),而DES的总MACCE发生率与CABG组相比差异无统计学意义。结论:糖尿病多支血管病变患者置入BMS后再次血管重建率和总MACCE发生率显著高于CABG,而DES的中期临床疗效并不逊于CABG。     

Five year clinical effect of coronary stenting and coronary artery bypass grafting in renal insufficient patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: insights from ARTS trial.

AIMS: To compare coronary stent implantation and bypass surgery for multivessel coronary disease in patients with renal insufficiency. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the ARTS trial, 142 moderate renal insufficient patients (Ccr<60 mL/min) with multivessel coronary disease were randomly assigned to stent implantation (n=69) or CABG (n=73). At 5 years, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of mortality (14.5% in the stent group vs. 12.3% in the CABG group, P=0.81), or combined endpoint of death, cerebrovascular accident (CVA), or myocardial infarction (MI) (30.4% in the stent group vs. 23.3% in the CABG group, P=0.35). Among patients who survived without CVA or MI, 18.8% in the stent group underwent a second revascularization procedure when compared with 8.2% in the surgery group (P=0.08). The event-free survival at 5 years was 50.7% in the stent group and 68.5% in the surgery group (P=0.04). CONCLUSION: At 5 years, the differences in mortality and combined incidence of death, CVA, and MI between coronary stenting and surgery did not reach statistically significant level. However, the occurrence of MACCE in the stent group was higher than in the CABG group, mainly driven by the higher incidence of repeat revascularization in the stent group.     

Multivessel coronary stenting versus bypass surgery in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and normal left ventricular function: immediate and 2-year long-term follow-up

BACKGROUND: Compared with coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG), the clinical benefits of intracoronary stenting have not been established in patients with multivessel coronary lesions. METHODS AND RESULTS: To compare the clinical outcomes of intracoronary stenting with that of CABG, we reviewed the outcomes of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease from an observational database. Two hundred consecutive patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and normal left ventricular function were evaluated. In 200 patients, multivessel stenting was performed in 100 and CABG was performed in 100. Complete revascularization was achieved in 95% in the CABG group and in 69% in the stent group (P <.05). The duration of total hospital stay and coronary care unit admission was significantly shorter in the stent group (P <.05). The long-term survival was similar between the 2 groups. There were no significant differences of cardiac events between the 2 groups except for the recurrence of angina (19% in stenting vs 8% in CABG, P =.03) and target lesion revascularization (19% vs 2%, P <.01) in the patients with stents. CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and normal left ventricular function, intracoronary stenting may offer an effective alternative to coronary bypass surgery.     

Meta-analysis of 5-year outcomes of CABG vs PCI with stenting in patients with multivessel disease

AIM: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to systematically review and synthesize existing data on long term outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with multiple stenting in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. METHODS: Three randomized control trials of CABG versus stenting with a 5-year follow-up and a total number of 2 063 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The primary end-point of the study was freedom from major adverse cardiovascular events at 5 years. RESULTS: After 5 years of follow-up, 42.81% of patients randomized to PCI with stenting versus 20.81% of patients randomized to CABG reached the primary clinical end-point(relative risk [RR] 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.38-3.38). Repeat revascularization procedures occurred more frequently in patients allocated to PCI with multiple stenting compared with CABG (30.29% versus 7.45%, RR 4.47 and 95% CI 2.75-7.29). Non fatal myocardial infarction (MI) (6.6% versus 6.2%, RR 1.00 and 95% CI 0.58-1.70) was nearly equal in the two groups while deaths (9.3% versus 7.4%, RR 1.50 and 95% CI 0.61-3.66) were slightly higher in patients treated by PCI as compared to CABG. CONCLUSION: Five years after the initial procedure, there is no survival benefit for CABG over PCI, but major adverse cardiovascular events and repeat revascularization procedures are high after PCI.     

冠心病多支病变雷帕霉素洗脱支架置入与冠状动脉旁路移植术的疗效对比

目的:对比雷帕霉素洗脱支架(SES)置入与冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABO)的近期与中期临床疗效.方法:单中心回顾性连续入选2003年7月～2004年6月期间行择期血运重建的多支冠状动脉病变患者,分为CAB(;组(811例),SES组(251例).随访终点事件包括死亡、心肌梗死、脑卒中和再次血运重建等主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE).采用Kaplan-Meier方法估计无事件生存率.采用Logistic多元回归方法调整分析治疗对终点事件的相对影响.结果:随访率90.3%.中位随访时间19个月.随访30 d,CABG组MACCE的发生率高于SES组(5.4%: 1.6%,OR 3.66,95%CI 1.26～10.61),CABG组的病死率高于SES组(4.6%:1.2%,OR4.02,95%CI 1.18～13.74).至随访结束,SES组累积病死率低于CAB(;组(3.1%:7.6%,OR 0.44,95%CI0.19～0.99),但再次血运重建率高于CABG组(8.4%:1.5%,OR 6.83,95%CI 3.07～15.19),MACCE 2组间差异无统计学意义.以30 d为分期分析,CABG组30d生存率低于SES组(95.4%;98.8%,P＜0.05),2组30d后生存率差异无统计学意义(97.2%:98.3%,P＞0.05).结论:多支冠状动脉病变CABG与SES置入比较,CABG的30 d病死率高于SES置入,30 d后病死率差异无统计学意义;多支冠状动脉SES置入的中期血运重建率高于CABG.     

Is the advantage of coronary bypass surgery over percutaneous coronary intervention in diabetic patients with severe multivessel disease influenced by the status of insulin requirement?

Several studies have shown that coronary artery bypass graft surgery （CABG） is superior to percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） in patients with diabetes and multi-vessel disease. Whether this advantage of CABG over PCI is confined to diabetics who require insulin is unknown. We review the published literature comparing CABG with PCI in diabetics including 8 cohorts and 4,786 patients. There was a lower rate for all-cause mortality （Relative risk （RR）： 0.78, 95% confidence interval （CI）： 0.62-0.99）, and for major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events （MACCE, RR： 0.59, 95% CI： 0.47-0.75） for CABG compared to PCI. Composite outcome of mortality, myocardial infarction and stoke was similar between CABG and PCI （RR： 0.87, 95% CI： 0.54-1.42）. Visual inspection of the forest plots showed that in most analyses, the point estimates of the RR are similar between the insulin requiring group and non-insulin requiring group. On meta-regression, there was no interaction between status of insulin requirement and revascularization strategies （P 〉 0.05 for all）. The pre- sented data on the still unpublished analysis of the FREEDOM trial showed similar results. Thus, in the current era, CABG is superior to PCI with lower mortality and MACCE rates, but the state of insulin requirement had no effect on the outcomes from the two revascularization strategies.     

Comparison of percutaneous interventions for unstable angina pectoris in patients with and without previous coronary artery bypass grafting

An increasing number of patients who have undergone previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are referred for percutaneous coronary revascularization. We identified patients who underwent percutaneous intervention for unstable angina from 1990 to 1998 at our institution and assigned them into 2 groups based on whether or not they had undergone previous CABG. There were 1,431 patients with and 4,629 patients without previous CABG. Previous CABG patients were older, had more atherosclerotic risk factors, more heart failure, lower ejection fraction, more multivessel disease, more multilesion treatment, more complex lesions, and less complete revascularization. Adjusting for baseline differences, previous CABG was associated with worse long-term mortality (RR 1.47, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.22 to 1.77, p < 0.001) and death, myocardial infarction, and/or revascularization (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.30, p = 0.01); treatment of native lesions in patients with previous CABG versus treatment of vein graft lesions was associated with a reduction in this composite end point (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.87, p < 0.001). Post-CABG patients treated between 1995 and 1998 had lower long-term mortality (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.99, p = 0.04) and death, myocardial infarction, and/or revascularization (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.88, p < 0.001) compared with those treated between 1990 and 1994. Thus, in patients with unstable angina referred for percutaneous revascularization, previous CABG is associated with reduced event-free survival, although the outcome of post-CABG patients treated from 1995 to 1998 is superior to that observed in patients treated from 1990 to 1994. In patients who underwent previous CABG, treatment of native lesions affords better long-term outcome than vein graft intervention.     

Survival of patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease after surgical or percutaneous coronary revascularization: results of a large regional prospective study. Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess survival among patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and after coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG). BACKGROUND: The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) demonstrated that diabetics with MVD survive longer after initial CABG than after initial PCI. Other randomized trials or observational databases have not conclusively reproduced this result. METHODS: A large, regional database was linked to the National Death Index to assess five-year mortality. Of 7,159 consecutive patients with diabetes who underwent coronary revascularization in northern New England during 1992 to 1996, 2,766 (38.6%) were similar to those randomized in the BARI trial. Percutaneous coronary intervention was the initial revascularization strategy in 736 patients and CABG in 2,030. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to calculate risk-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI 95%). RESULTS: Patients who underwent PCI were younger, had higher ejection fractions and less extensive coronary disease. After adjusting for differences in baseline clinical characteristics, patients with diabetes treated with PCI had significantly greater mortality relative to those undergoing CABG (HR = 1.49; CI 95%: 1.02 to 2.17; p = 0.037). Mortality risk tended to increase more among 1,251 patients with 3VD (HR = 2.02; CI 95%: 1.04 to 3.91; p = 0.038) than among 1,515 patients with 2VD (HR = 1.33; CI 95%: 0.84 to 2.1; p = 0.21). CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of a large regional contemporary database of patients with diabetes selected to be similar to those enrolled in the BARI trial, five-year mortality was significantly increased after initial PCI. This supports the BARI conclusion on initial revascularization of patients with diabetes and MVD.     

Five-year outcomes of surgical or percutaneous myocardial revascularization in diabetic patients

Background

The study compares five-year clinical outcomes of CABG vs PCI in a real world population of diabetic patients with multivessel coronary disease since it is not clear whether to prefer surgical or percutaneous revascularization.

Methods

Between July 2002 and December 2008, 2885 multivessel coronary diabetic patients underwent revascularization (1466 CABG and 1419 PCI) at hospitals in Emilia-Romagna Region, Italy and were followed for 1827 ± 617 days by record linkage of two clinical registries with the regional administrative database of hospital admissions and the mortality registry. Five-year incidences of MACCE (mortality, acute myocardial infarction [AMI], stroke, and repeat revascularization [TVR]) were assessed with Kaplan–Meier estimates, Cox proportional hazards regression and cumulative incidence functions of death and TVR, to evaluate the competing risk of AMI on death and TVR. The same analyses were applied to the propensity score matched subgroup of patients undergoing CABG or PCI with DES and with complete revascularization.

Results

PCI had higher mortality for all causes (HR: 1.8, 95% CI 1.4–2.2 p < 0.0001), AMI (HR: 3.3, 95% CI 2.4–4.6 p < 0.0001) and TVR (HR: 4.5, 95% CI 3.4–6.1 p < 0.0001). No significant differences emerged for stroke (HR: 0.8, 95% CI 0.5–1.2 p = 0.26).The higher incidence of AMI caused higher mortality in PCI group. Results did not change comparing CABG with PCI patients receiving complete revascularization or DES only.

Conclusions

Diabetics show a higher incidence of MACCE with PCI than with CABG: thus diabetes and its degree of control should be considered when choosing the type of revascularization.     

Comparison of coronary drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with diabetes mellitus

We compared 1-year outcome after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation with off-pump bypass grafing (OPCABG) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease involving the proximal segment of the left anterior descending coronary artery. All consecutive diabetic patients treated by DES (DES group) or OPCABG (CABG group) in our institution from April 2002 to December 2004 because of de novo coronary lesions were included. Patients in the CABG group (n = 149) were older and had a higher rate of 3-vessel disease than those in the DES group (n = 69). At 12 months, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events occurred in 29% of the DES group and 20.5% of the CABG group (unadjusted analysis, odds ratio 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93 to 1.54, p = 0.17). After propensity score analysis, adjusting for baseline differences between the 2 cohorts, DESs increased the risk of 12-month major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (hazard ratio 1.88, 95% CI 1.09 to 3.02, p = 0.020). This was due to the higher rate for repeat revascularization in the DES group (19% vs 5%, odds ratio 2.05, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.75, p = 0.001). In contrast, there was no difference in the rate of the composite end points of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke (DES group 13%, CABG group 12%; adjusted analysis, hazard ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.35, p = 0.40). In conclusion, at 1 year in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease involving the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery, the advantage of OPCABG over DES implantation seems to be limited at a lower rate of repeat revascularization. No difference seems to exist in the rate of death, stroke, and myocardial infarction.     

Percutaneous versus surgical revascularization for multivessel coronary artery disease: A single center 10 year follow‐up of SOS trial patients

Objectives: To compare 10 year outcomes including death, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), repeat revascularization (RR), and severity of angina (CCS) after randomization to stent supported percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or surgical revascularization (CABG) in a single center participating in the SOS trial. Background: Randomized studies show increased RR following PCI, but otherwise similar results to CABG in selected mutlivessel disease patients with up to 5 year follow up. There is no 10 year data available. Materials and methods: The analysis involved 100 patients randomized into the SOS study in Poland. Results: Patients were well matched for baseline demographic and angiographic characteristics. During 9.6 ± 0.85 year observation, there was no significant difference between groups for survival, CCS, and LVEF. Increased RR occurred following PCI; 21 (42%) vs. 9 (18%), P < 0.05. As a consequence, the MACCE was also significantly higher following PCI; 36 (72%) vs. 28 (56%), P < 0.05. Excess RR predominantly occurred in the first year and diminished over time with numerically less RR following PCI from year 5 to 10; 2 (4%) vs. 7 (14%), P = ns. Conclusions: These findings suggest that patients with multivessel coronary artery disease technically suitable for either stent supported PCI or CABG have very similar 10 year outcomes with respect to mortality, angina class, LVEF, and MACCE other than RR. Excess RR following PCI predominantly occurs in early years and is numerically lower following PCI in years 5–10. This underscores the need for longer‐term follow up from randomized trials. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Late loss of early benefit from drug-eluting stents when compared with bare-metal stents and coronary artery bypass surgery: 3 years follow-up of the ERACI III registry.

Aims: Long-term benefit from coronary revascularization with drug-eluting stents (DES) relative to bare metal stents (BMS) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has not been established. One year follow-up of the ERACI III registry study showed better outcome with DES. To compare major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rates in patients with multivessel cardiovascular disease (CVD) who received DES with those patients treated with BMS or CABG in the ERACI II trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with multivessel CVD who met the ERACI II trial, clinical and angiographic inclusion criteria were treated with DES and enrolled in the ERACI III registry. The primary endpoint was 3-year MACCE. ERACI III-DES patients (n = 225) were compared with the BMS (n = 225) and CABG (n = 225) arms of ERACI II. Patients treated with DES were older, more often smokers, more often high risk by euroSCORE and less frequently had unstable angina. They also had higher incidence of type C lesions and received more stents than the BMS-treated cohort. Three year MACCE was lower in ERACI III-DES (22.7%) than in ERACI II-BMS (29.8%, P = 0.015), mainly reflecting less target vessel revascularization (14.2 vs. 24.4%, P = 0.009). MACCE rates at 3 years were similar in DES and CABG-treated patients (22.7%, P = 1.0), in contrast to results at 1 year (12 vs. 19.6%, P = 0.038). MACCE rates in ERACI III-DES were higher in diabetics (RR 0.81, 0.66-0.99; P = 0.018). Death or non-fatal MI at 3 years trended higher in the DES (10.2%) than BMS cohort (6.2%, P = 0.08) and lower than in CABG patients (15.1%, P = 0.07). Sub-acute late-stent thrombosis (LST) (>30 days) occurred in nine DES patients and no BMS patients (P = 0.008). CONCLUSION: In patients with multivessel CVD, the initial advantage for PCI with DES over CABG observed at 1 year was not apparent by 3 years. Furthermore, despite continued lower incidence of MACCE, initial advantage over BMS appeared to decrease with time. LST occurred more frequent in DES-treated patients.     

Influence of diabetes mellitus on long-term (five-year) outcomes of drug-eluting stents and coronary artery bypass grafting for multivessel coronary revascularization

Diabetes mellitus is a major risk factor for coronary artery disease (CAD) and for diffuse and progressive atherosclerosis. We evaluated the outcomes of drug-eluting stent (DES) placement and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in 891 diabetic patients (489 for DES implantation and 402 for CABG) and 2,151 nondiabetic patients (1,058 for DES implantation and 1,093 for CABG) with multivessel CAD treated from January 2003 through December 2005 and followed up for a median 5.6 years. Outcomes of interest included death; the composite outcome of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke; and repeat revascularization. In diabetic patients, after adjusting for baseline covariates, 5-year risk of death (hazard ratio 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.33, p = 0.96) and the composite of death, MI, or stroke (hazard ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 1.31, p = 0.91) were similar in patients undergoing DES or CABG. However, rate of repeat revascularization was significantly higher in the DES group (hazard ratio 3.69, 95% confidence interval 2.64 to 5.17, p <0.001). These trends were consistent in nondiabetic patients (hazard ratio 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.55 to 1.16, p = 0.23 for death; hazard ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.56 to 1.05, p = 0.10 for composite of death, MI, or stroke; hazard ratio 2.77, 95% CI 1.95 to 3.91, p <0.001 for repeat revascularization). There was no significant interaction between diabetic status and treatment strategy on clinical outcomes (p for interaction = 0.36 for death; 0.20 for the composite of death, MI, or stroke; and 0.40 for repeat revascularization). In conclusion, there was no significant prognostic influence of diabetes on long-term treatment with DES or CABG in patients with multivessel CAD.     

Baseline clinical and angiographic variables associated with long-term outcome after successful intracoronary stent implantation.

Although randomized studies have demonstrated improved outcomes with stents over balloon angioplasty in straightforward coronary narrowings in low-risk patients, this advantage is less clear for complex lesions and high-risk patients. This study was designed to identify clinical and angiographic variables that are associated with long-term outcome after stent implantation. We identified 1,709 patients undergoing successful stent placement without in-hospital major adverse events. We analyzed clinical, lesional, and procedural variables to determine their correlation with outcome. Mean duration of follow-up was 1.6 +/- 1.4 years. Cox proportional-hazards models and stepwise methods were used to assess which covariates were potentially related to each end point. The occurrence of death/myocardial infarction (MI) was associated with any history of congestive heart failure (relative risk [RR] 3.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.3 to 4.7, p <0.0001), procedure within 24 hours of MI (RR 2.3, CI 1.3 to 4.1, p = 0.0048), vein graft intervention (RR 1.8, CI 1.3 to 2.6, p = 0.0007), and prior MI (RR 1.8, CI 1.2 to 2.6, p = 0.004). Repeat revascularization was associated with multivessel stent placement (RR 1.8, CI 1.2 to 2.8, p = 0.006) and stent for abrupt closure (RR 1.7, CF 1.1 to 2.7, p = 0.03), but was less frequent with de novo lesions and right coronary artery lesions (RR 0.6, CI 0.5 to 0.8, p = 0.0007, and RR 0.8, CI 0.6 to 1.0, p = 0.05, respectively). The cumulative end point of death/MI/repeat revascularization was associated with congestive heart failure (RR 1.7, CI 1.3 to 2.2, p <0.0001), multivessel stent placement (RR 1.6, Cl 1.1 to 2.3, p = 0.03), warfarin therapy (RR 1.4, CI 1.2 to 1.8, p = 0.001), and procedure within 24 hours of MI (RR 1.5, CI 1.1 to 2.1, p = 0.02), but was less frequent with complete revascularization and right coronary artery intervention (RR 0.8, CI 0.7 to 0.99, p = 0.04, and RR 0.7, CI 0.6 to 0.9, p = 0.009, respectively). Thus, this study demonstrates that there are readily identifiable characteristics in patients treated successfully with stents that are associated with long-term outcome.     

Clinical Outcomes of Revascularization Strategies for Patients With MVD/LMCA Disease: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR), a new minimally invasive procedure for patients requiring revascularization for multivessel coronary lesions, combines coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left anterior descending (LAD) lesions and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non-LAD coronary lesions. However, available data related to outcomes comparing the 3 revascularization therapies is limited to small studies.We conducted a search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library of Controlled Trials up to December 31, 2014, without language restriction. A total of 16 randomized trials (n=4858 patients) comparing HCR versus PCI or off-pump CABG (OPCAB) were included in this meta-analysis. The primary outcomes were major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), cerebrovascular events (CVE), and target vessel revascularization (TVR). Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effect and fixed-effect models. Ranking probabilities were used to calculate a summary numerical value: the surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) curve.No significant differences were seen between the HCR and PCI in short term (in hospital and 30 days) with regard to MACCE (odds ratio [OR] = 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00–2.35), all-cause death (OR = 2.09, 95% CI 0.34–7.66), MI (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.19–2.95), CVE (OR = 4.45, 95% CI 0.39–19.16), and TVR (OR = 6.99, 95% CI 0.17–39.39). However, OPCAB had lower MACCE than HCR (OR = 0.19, 95% CI 0.00–0.95). In midterm (1 year and 3 year), in comparison with HCR, PCI had higher all-cause death (OR = 5.66, 95% CI 0.00–13.88) and CVE (OR = 4.40, 95% CI 0.01–5.68), and lower MI (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.00–2.86), TVR (OR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.05–2.26), and thus the MACCE (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.00–2.35). Off-pump CABG presented a better outcome than HCR with significant lower MACCE (OR = 0.17, 95% CI 0.01–0.68). Surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities showed that HCR may be the superior strategy for MVD and LMCA disease when regarded to MACCE (SUCRA = 0.84), MI (SUCRA = 0.76) in short term, and regarded to MACCE (SUCRA = 0.99), MI (SUCRA = 0.94), and CVE (SUCRA = 0.92) in midterm.Hybrid coronary revascularization seemed to be a feasible and acceptable option for treatment of LMCA disease and MVD. More powerful evidences are required to precisely evaluate risks and benefits of the 3 therapies for patients who have different clinical characteristics.     

Restenosis after intracoronary stent placement: can apolipoprotein(a) polymorphism play a role?

BACKGROUND: The relationship between lipoprotein(a) and restenosis after intracoronary stent implantation has been analysed by two specific studies, but the role of apoliprotein(a) polymorphism was not considered. The aim of the present prospective study was to evaluate whether lipoprotein(a) levels and apolipoprotein(a) phenotypes are predictors of restenosis after elective stent implantation in patients with de novo lesions of coronary arteries. METHODS: We recruited 182 patients with a new lesion successfully treated with elective placement of one or two Palmaz-Schatz stents. Follow-up angiography was scheduled at 6 months or earlier if clinically indicated. Nine patients were lost to the follow up. Among 173 patients enrolled, restenosis was present in 52 (30.0%) and absent in 121 (70.0%). RESULTS: Lipoprotein(a) levels were higher in the restenosis than in the nonrestenosis group (29.5+/-17.2 versus 27.4+/-20.2 mg/dl), even if the difference did not attain statistical significance (P=0.067). The restenosis group had a percentage of subjects with at least one apolipoprotein(a) isoform of low molecular weight significantly greater than the nonrestenosis group (82.7 versus 66.9%; P=0.035). A multiple logistic regression analysis showed that multiple stenting (RR: 4.01; CI 95%: 1.65-13.91; P=0.004), presence of diabetes (RR: 3.96; CI 95%: 1.67-9.37; P=0.002) and presence of multivessel disease (RR: 2.71; CI 95%: 1.19-6.16; P=0.017) were predictors of restenosis after stent placement. Lipoprotein(a) and apolipoprotein(a) polymorphism did not enter the model as predictive variables. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms that multiple stenting, diabetes and multivessel disease are powerful predictors of restenosis after intracoronary stent implantation. On the contrary, lipoprotein(a) and apolipoprotein(a) polymorphism do not appear to be reliable markers of restenosis in patients with stent implantation.     

Argentine Randomized Study: Coronary Angioplasty with Stenting versus Coronary Bypass Surgery in patients with Multiple-Vessel Disease (ERACI II): 30-day and one-year follow-up results. ERACI II Investigators

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare percutaneous transluminal coronary revascularization (PTCR) employing stent implantation to conventional coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) in symptomatic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. BACKGROUND: Previous randomized studies comparing balloon angioplasty versus CABG have demonstrated equivalent safety results. However, CABG was associated with significantly fewer repeat revascularization procedures. METHODS: A total of 2,759 patients with coronary artery disease were screened at seven clinical sites, and 450 patients were randomly assigned to undergo either PTCR (225 patients) or CABG (225 patients). Only patients with multivessel disease and indication for revascularization were enrolled. RESULTS: Both groups had similar clinical demographics: unstable angina in 92%; 38% were older than 65 years, and 23% had a history of peripheral vascular disease. During the first 30 days, PTCR patients had lower major adverse events (death, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization procedures and stroke) compared with CABG patients (3.6% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.002). Death occurred in 0.9% of PTCR patients versus 5.7% in CABG patients, p < 0.013, and Q myocardial infarction (MI) occurred in 0.9% PTCR versus 5.7% of CABG patients, p < 0.013. At follow-up (mean 18.5 +/- 6.4 months), survival was 96.9% in PTCR versus 92.5% in CABG, p < 0.017. Freedom from MI was also better in PTCR compared to CABG patients (97.7% vs. 93.4%, p < 0.017). Requirements for new revascularization procedures were higher in PTCR than in CABG patients (16.8% vs. 4.8%, p < 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In this selected high-risk group of patients with multivessel disease, PTCR with stent implantation showed better survival and freedom from MI than did conventional surgery. Repeat revascularization procedures were higher in the PTCR group.     

Short- and long-term results after multivessel stenting in diabetic patients

OBJECTIVES: The present study evaluated clinical outcomes in diabetic patients after multivessel stenting. BACKGROUND: Multivessel angioplasty studies have reported decreased survival in diabetic patients undergoing conventional balloon angioplasty compared with coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). However, several studies have demonstrated excellent procedural success and acceptable clinical outcomes after multivessel stenting. METHODS: Multivessel stenting was performed in 689 patients with 1,639 native coronary lesions. Patients were classified into three groups according to diabetes mellitus (DM) status: 1) no DM (501 patients/1,200 lesions); 2) DM treated with oral agents (102 patients/235 lesions); and 3) DM treated with insulin (86 patients/204 lesions). RESULTS: Procedural success was high overall. In-hospital CABG was higher in diabetics treated with insulin compared with the other two groups (3.5% vs. 0.4% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in the incidence of in-hospital cardiac death and myocardial infarction. Diabetic patients treated with oral agents or insulin had higher one-year target lesion revascularization rates than non-diabetic patients (25% vs. 35% vs. 16%, p < 0.001). Lower one-year survival was observed in diabetic patients treated with either oral agents or insulin, compared with non-diabetic patients (85% vs. 86% vs. 95%, p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, DM was an independent predictor of one-year mortality, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization after multivessel stenting. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a high technical success rate of multivessel stenting, diabetic patients, especially those treated with insulin, have higher in-hospital CABG, higher subsequent revascularization rates, and lower one-year survival than non-diabetic patients.     

In hospital observation of patients with acute coronary syndrome without ST elevation and multivessels coronary artery disease treated with early invasive strategy. Comparison of results of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery by-pass grafting

Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) without persistent ST-segment elevation are the main cause of hospitalization, morbidity and mortality. The objective of this study was to compare clinical and angiographic parameters as well as in-hospital results of treating 307 consecutive patients with ACS without persistent ST-segment elevation with either PCI or CABG. Inclusion criteria were: rest angina within the last 24 hours, ST-segment depression (> 0.5 mm), T-wave inversion (> 1 mm) in at least two leads, positive serum cardiac markers. PCI was performed in 75.9% of patients and 24.1% of patients underwent CABG. Both groups did not differ as to age, sex, history of diabetes, arterial hypertension, heart failure, smoking and ejection fraction. Positive troponin was significantly more frequent in the PCI group. 51% of PCI patients and 80% of CABG patients had complete revascularization (p = 0.00001). Independent predictors of in-hospital death in the CABG group were: inability to determine culprit vessel during coronary angiography due to lesions' severity (OR 13.65; 95% CI 9.40-15.20; p = 0.007) and heart failure (OR 15.58; 95% CI 12.29-18.01; p = 0.003). In the PCI group these independent predictors were: Braunwald's IIIC unstable angina (OR 5.48; 95% CI 3.10-7.17; p = 0.04) and diabetes (OR 2.22; 95% CI 1.07-3.90; p = 0.003). In-hospital mortality rate was significantly higher in the CABG group (8.1% vs 1.7% p < 0.01). Patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and ACS without ST-segment elevation treated with PCI have better in-hospital outcome than patients assigned to CABG, but the rate of complete revascularization is lower.     

Clinical and economic outcomes of multivessel coronary stenting compared with bypass surgery: a single-center US experience

Background Randomized trials comparing multivessel stenting with coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) have demonstrated similar rates of death and myocardial infarction but higher rates of repeat revascularization after stenting. The impact of these alternative strategies on overall medical care costs is uncertain, particularly within the US health care system. Methods We performed a retrospective, matched cohort study to compare the clinical and economic outcomes of multivessel stenting and bypass surgery. The stent group consisted of 100 consecutive patients who underwent stenting of ≥2 major native coronary arteries at our institution. The CABG group consisted of 200 patients who underwent nonemergent isolated bypass surgery during the same time frame, matched (2:1) for age, sex, ejection fraction, diabetes mellitus, and extent of coronary disease. Detailed clinical follow-up and resource utilization data were collected for a minimum of 2 years. Total costs were calculated by use of year 2000 unit prices. Results Over a median follow up period of 2.8 years, there were no significant differences in all-cause mortality rates (3.0% vs 3.0%), Q-wave myocardial infarction (5.1% vs 4.0%), or the composite of death or myocardial infarction (7.1% vs 7.0%) between the stent and CABG groups (P = not significant for all comparisons). However, at 2-year follow up, patients with stents were more likely to require ≥1 repeat revascularization procedure (32.0% vs 4.5%, P < .001). The initial cost of multivessel stenting was 43% less than the cost of CABG ($11,810 vs $20,574, P < .001) and remained 27% less ($17,634 vs $24,288, P = .005) at 2 years. Conclusions Multivessel stenting and CABG result in comparable risks of death and myocardial infarction. Despite a higher rate of repeat revascularization, multivessel stenting was significantly less costly than CABG through the first 2 years of follow-up. (Am Heart J 2003;145:334-42.)