Revascularization of left anterior descending coronary artery in patients with single and multivessel disease: comparison between off-pump internal thoracic artery and drug-eluting stent

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The left anterior descending artery (LADA), particularly when the proximal segment of the vessel is involved, is a challenging area for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs); therefore, coronary artery bypass grafting is often considered and sometimes performed even in patients with single-vessel disease involving the LADA. This study compares mid-term results of LADA revascularization with a drug-eluting stent (DES), with off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) in patients with single-vessel or multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). DESIGN: Matched-groups, retrospective cohort comparison between the DES and OPCAB. PATIENTS: From June 2002 to December 2003, 354 patients underwent myocardial revascularization of the LADA by OPCAB, and 168 by DES. After matching for age, sex, and extent of CAD, two groups (116 patients each) were used to compare the two revascularization modalities. The groups were similar; however, an ejection fraction of <30%, old myocardial infarction, and use of an intraaortic balloon pump were more prevalent in the OPCAB group. RESULTS: The average number of coronary vessels treated per patient in the two groups was similar (OPCAB, 1.97; DES, 1.6; p = 0.581). The 30-day mortality rate was 0.9% in the OPCAB group and 0% in the DES group (p = 0.329). The mean duration of follow-up was 12 months. There was one late death in each group. Angina returned in 31% of patients in the DES group and in 11.2% of the patients in the OPCAB group (p = 0.001). There were 12 reinterventions in the DES group compared to three reinterventions in the surgical group (p = 0.020). The only independent predictor (Cox proportional hazards regression model) of the return of angina (risk ratio [RR], 3.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.57 to 7.14) and reintervention (RR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.34 to 11.24) was assignment to the DES group. CONCLUSIONS: The mid-term clinical outcome of OPCAB in patients with CAD, including multivessel disease, was better than that for PCIs with only one DES used in patients with similar extents of CAD.     

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.     

Early and mid-term impacts of cardiopulmonary bypass on coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with poor left ventricular dysfunction: a propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cardiopulmonary bypass may exacerbate myocardial damage in compromised left ventricles. Early and mid-term outcomes of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) vs on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (On-pump CABG) were compared in patients with poor left ventricular dysfunction, using an analysis of a propensity score matching. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between December 2000 and November 2005, 1,473 patients underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting in our institute and 153 patients who had a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) lower than 35% were enrolled. The OPCAB group contained 100 patients and the On-pump CABG group contained 53 patients. Preoperative risk factors were compared and 50 patients in each group were matched. The mean follow-up time was 35.5+/-17.3 months. Three deaths (3.0%) occurred in the matched cohort, with no significant difference between 2 groups. The operation time, ventilation time, intensive care unit admission time and occurrence of respiratory failure were significantly lower in the OPCAB group. The mean LVEF of the 2 groups improved significantly. The overall 6-year actuarial survival rates of the OPCAB and On-pump CABG group were 88.2% and 72.4% (p=0.2), respectively, and there were no significant differences in 6-year rates of freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (p=0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with poor left ventricular dysfunction improved myocardial function. Postoperative respiratory failure was significantly related to the cardiopulmonary bypass for surgical myocardial revascularization. Off-pump and On-pump surgical revascularization resulted in equivalent mid-term outcomes.     

Comparison of drug-eluting stents versus surgery for unprotected left main coronary artery disease

This study was conducted to compare the clinical outcomes of drug-eluting stents (DESs) with those of standard bypass surgery for the treatment of patients with left main lesions in a single-center experience. From January 2000 to October 2005, a total of 96 patients with significant unprotected left main disease were treated with DES implantation, and 245 with bypass surgery. Baseline features, such as Euroscore, were similar between groups, except for diabetes and hypertension, which were more frequent in the surgical group. The combination of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeated revascularization (major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events [MACCEs]) at 30 days occurred in 2.1% after DES implant and 9.0% after surgery (p=0.03). At 1 year, DES-treated patients more frequently needed repeat revascularization (5.2% vs 0.8%; p=0.02), although combined MACCE rates were similar (10.4% for DES, 11.4% for surgery; p=0.50). Moreover, after a mean follow-up of 1.3+/-0.8 and 3.2+/-1.6 years for the DES and surgical groups, there were no significant differences in MACCEs, respectively. In conclusion, in our experience, percutaneous treatment of patients with unprotected left main disease with DESs provided similar clinical results compared with surgical revascularization at a midterm follow-up.     

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.     

Comparison of drug-eluting versus bare metal stents in cardiac allograft vasculopathy

Although not a definitive treatment, percutaneous coronary intervention offers a palliative benefit to patients with cardiac allograft vasculopathy. Given the superior outcomes with drug-eluting stents (DESs) over bare metal stents (BMSs) in native coronary artery disease, similar improvements might be expected in transplant patients; however, the results have been mixed. Consecutive cardiac transplantation recipients at a single center receiving a stent for de novo cardiac allograft vasculopathy from 1997 to 2009 were retrospectively analyzed according to receipt of a DES versus a BMS. The angiographic and clinical outcomes were subsequently evaluated at 1 year. The baseline clinical and procedural characteristics were similar among those receiving DESs (n = 18) and BMSs (n = 16). Quantitative coronary angiography revealed no difference in the reference diameter, lesion length, or pre-/postprocedural minimal luminal diameter. At the 12-month angiographic follow-up visit, the mean lumen loss was significantly lower in the DES group than in the BMS group (0.19 ± 0.73 mm vs 0.76 ± 0.97 mm, p = 0.02). The DES group also had a lower rate of in-stent restenosis (12.5% vs 33%, p = 0.18), as well as a significantly lower rate of target lesion revascularization (0% vs 19%, p = 0.03). At 1 year, DESs were associated with a lower composite rate of cardiac death and nonfatal myocardial infarction (12% vs 38%, p = 0.04). In conclusion, DESs are safe and effective in the suppression of neointimal hyperplasia after percutaneous coronary intervention for cardiac allograft vasculopathy, resulting in significantly lower rates of late lumen loss and target lesion revascularization, as well as a reduced combined rate of cardiac death and nonfatal myocardial infarction.     

老年多支血管病变患者置入药物洗脱支架与冠状动脉旁路移植术后近远期临床结果

目的:本研究旨在比较老年(年龄≥75岁)稳定性冠心病合并多支血管病变患者行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)置入药物洗脱支架(DES)与冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的近远期临床结果。方法:本研究于2003年7月至2006年12月,连续入选年龄≥75岁稳定性冠心病合并多支血管病变患者363例,在我院行PCI置入DES(n=269)或CABG(n=94)治疗。主要终点为24个月时主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE),次要终点为24个月时全因死亡及非致死性心肌梗死(MI)、脑血管事件和再次血运重建以及全因死亡、非致死性MI和脑血管事件复合终点事件。结果:住院期间,CABG组的病死率(7.4%vs.1.9%,P=0.023)和非致死性MI的发生率(3.2%vs.0,P=0.023),明显高于DES组,CABG组的MACCE的发生率也明显高于DES组(10.6%vs.1.9%,P=0.001)。多因素回归分析结果显示:24个月时,CABG组和DES组的主要终点事件的风险未见明显差异[22.3%vs.15.2%,风险比(HR)=1.62,95%CI 0.63～3.31,P=0.379],两组的全因死亡、心源性死亡、非致死性MI、脑血管事件和再次血运重建的风险也没有明显差异;CABG组全因死亡、非致死性MI和脑血管事件复合终点事件的风险明显高于DES组(19.1%vs.8.2%,HR 3.87,95%CI:1.24～12.37,P=0.009)。结论:本研究提示,与DES相比,CABG可能会增加75岁以上多支血管病变患者的远期全因死亡、非致死性MI和脑血管事件复合终点事件的风险,而未降低再次血运重建和MACCE。     

Changes in patterns of coronary revascularization strategies for patients with acute coronary syndromes (from the CRUSADE Quality Improvement Initiative)

Since the introduction of drug-eluting stents (DESs), patterns of revascularization strategies for patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes have not been assessed. We studied 82,924 patients from the CRUSADE Initiative who presented with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes and underwent coronary angiography at 365 United States hospitals that had capabilities for surgical (coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]) and percutaneous (percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]) revascularization from January 2002 to June 2005. Temporal trends in the use of PCI, CABG, and medical management without revascularization were analyzed with respect to the introduction of DESs. In total, 73,577 patients (89%) had >50% stenosis in > or =1 coronary artery, and there was a significant increase in the use of PCI (vs CABG or medical management without revascularization) during the study period (38.3% vs 52.5%). By quarter 2 of 2005, 80% of patients who underwent PCI received a DES. In total, 18,462 of 25,068 patients (73.6%) with 3-vessel disease (3VD) underwent revascularization and use of CABG decreased for these patients (48.9% to 39.9%, p <0.001), whereas use of PCI increased (51.1% to 60.1%, p <0.001). Factors significantly associated with use of PCI for patients with 3VD who underwent any revascularization included previous PCI, previous CABG, cardiology inpatient care, care at an academic hospital, renal insufficiency, and previous congestive heart failure. In conclusion, coinciding with the introduction of DESs, there has been a significant increase in the use of PCI and, in those patients with 3VD, a decrease in the use of CABG with a shift toward increasing use of PCI. Long-term implications of this shift remain uncertain, especially in patients with 3VD.     

Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting versus stenting for patients with proximal left anterior descending coronary artery disease

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of stenting and minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCAB) in patients with proximal left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery disease. The Patency, Outcome, Economics of Minimally invasive direct coronary bypass (POEM) study demonstrated that MIDCAB had similar safety and long-term efficacy for LAD revascularization compared with conventional coronary artery bypass grafting. Although LAD stenting is superior to conventional balloon angioplasty, whether it is comparable to MIDCAB is not known. We identified a matched population of 429 consecutive patients with 1-vessel disease who underwent elective proximal LAD stenting and compared their clinical outcomes with those of the 152 patients in the MIDCAB group of the POEM study. The in-hospital event rate was similar in both groups, except for a shorter length of hospital stay with LAD stenting compared with MIDCAB (2.68 vs 4.07 days, p <0.0001). At 6-month follow-up, the incidence of death and Q-wave myocardial infarction or that of cerebrovascular accident was not significantly different between these 2 groups. However, target vessel revascularization was significantly higher with LAD stenting than MIDCAB (13.3% vs 6.6%, p = 0.045). In the subgroup of patients without diabetes, all clinical events were similar in both groups, and the benefit of a shorter hospital stay associated with stenting was maintained. Compared with MIDCAB, LAD stenting is associated with higher repeat revascularization rates but offers the advantage of shorter hospitalization. For nondiabetics with proximal LAD disease, stenting may be the revascularization strategy of choice.     

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。     

Are drug-eluting stents the preferred treatment for multivessel coronary artery disease?

Drug-eluting stents (DES) constitute a major breakthrough in restenosis prevention after initial percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Target lesion and vessel revascularization rates of <10% at six months follow-up represent a significant medical advance. Many cardiologists consider it reasonable to assume that PCI using DES ought to be considered equivalent, if not superior, to bypass surgery. The argument made is that in previous randomized clinical trials comparing PCI to coronary artery bypass grafting, restenosis was the determining factor favoring surgery, an event that clinical experience suggests is no longer as frequent. In the absence of a definitive clinical trial to support this view, how should the prudent, cutting edge cardiologist evaluate the data and manage their patients?     

Comparison of coronary artery bypass surgery with percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the clinical outcomes of consecutive, selected patients treated with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. BACKGROUND: Although recent data suggest that PCI with DES provides better clinical outcomes compared to bare-metal stenting for ULMCA disease, there is a paucity of data comparing PCI with DES to CABG. METHODS: Since April 2003, when DES first became available at our institution, 123 patients underwent CABG, and 50 patients underwent PCI with DES for ULMCA disease. RESULTS: High-risk patients (Parsonnet score >15) comprised 46% of the CABG group and 64% of the PCI group (p = 0.04). The 30-day major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rate for CABG and PCI was 17% and 2% (p < 0.01), respectively. The mean follow-up was 6.7 +/- 6.2 months in the CABG group and 5.6 +/- 3.9 months in the PCI group (p = 0.26). The estimated MACCE-free survival at six months and one year was 83% and 75% in the CABG group versus 89% and 83% in the PCI group (p = 0.20). By multivariable Cox regression, Parsonnet score, diabetes, and CABG were independent predictors of MACCE. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a higher percentage of high-risk patients, PCI with DES for ULMCA disease was not associated with an increase in immediate or medium-term complications compared with CABG. Our data suggest that a randomized comparison between the two revascularization strategies for ULMCA may be warranted.     

药物洗脱支架置入术与冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗冠心病多支病变的临床对比研究

目的:探讨药物洗脱支架(DES)治疗冠心病多支冠状动脉(冠脉)病变患者的临床疗效,并与冠脉旁路移植术进行比较.方法:入选2005-01-2008-01在我院行血管重建术的215例冠心病多支冠脉病变患者,其中114例行DES置入术(DES组),101例行冠脉旁路移植术 (CABG组).比较2组住院期和随访期不良心血管事件(死亡、非致死性心肌梗死、再次血管重建术和脑血管意外)的发生情况.结果:2组的临床和冠脉病变特征相似, 与DES组比较,CABG组左主干病变(29.2%∶5.0%,P<0.01)、LVEF<50%发生率(39.7%∶19.2%,P<0.01) 和完全血管重建率(81.2%∶58.8%, P<0.01)较高.住院期2组总体不良心血管事件发生率无明显差异,但CABG组住院期病死率有增高趋势(6.9%∶1.8%,P＞0.05).平均临床随访12～36(17±9)个月,2组总体不良心血管事件发生率仍无明显差异(9.6% ∶13.4%,P＞0.05) ,但DES组再次血管重建的发生率较CABG组有增高趋势(9.8%∶2.1%,P＞0.05).结论:DES置入术应用在冠心病多支冠脉病变患者中安全可行,总体不良心血管事件发生率与CABG无明显差异.     

Coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with multivessel coronary disease

BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents (DES) constitute a major breakthrough in restenosis prevention after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study compared the clinical outcomes of PCI using DES versus coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD) in real-world. METHODS: From January 2003 to December 2004, 466 consecutive patients with MVD underwent revascularization, 235 by PCI with DES and 231 by CABG. The study end-point was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) at the first 30 days after procedure and during follow-up. RESULTS: Most preoperative characteristics were similar in the two groups, but left main disease (24.7% vs 2.6%, P<0.001) and three-vessel disease (65% vs 54%, P = 0.02) were more prevalent in CABG group. The number of coronary lesions was also greater in CABG group (3.7 +/- 1.1 vs 3.3 +/- 1.1, P<0.001). Despite higher early morbidity (3.9% vs 0.8%, P = 0.03) associated with CABG, there were no significant differences in composite MACEs at the first 30 days between the two groups. During follow-up (mean 25+/-8 months), the incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or cerebrovascular event was similar in both groups (PCI 6.3% vs CABG 5.6%, P = 0.84). However, bypass surgery still afforded a lower need for repeat revascularization (2.8% vs 10.4%, p = 0.001). Consequently, overall MACE rate (14.5% vs 7.9%, P = 0.03) remained higher after PCI. CONCLUSION: PCI with DES is a safe and feasible alternative to CABG for selected patients with MVD. The reintervention gap was further narrowed in the era of DES. Aside from restenosis, progression of disease needs to receive substantial emphasis.     

Revascularization of unprotected left main coronary artery disease with percutaneous coronary intervention: the role of drug-eluting stents

The percutaneous revascularization of left main coronary artery stenosis has until recently been reserved for patients at prohibitive surgical risk or for selected emergent cases. This adopted practice of coronary artery bypass grafting, as the standard of care for left main coronary artery stenosis, has largely occurred secondary to disappointing results with bare metal stents implanted in the left main coronary artery. However, in the current era of drug-eluting stents (DES) which significantly reduce restenosis compared to bare metal stents, there has been a renewed interest in examining the role of percutaneous coronary intervention as a means of revascularization of left main disease. This article discusses recent and ongoing studies investigating the role of percutaneous intervention of left main disease, with an emphasis on the use of DES for this purpose.     

非体外循环与常规冠状动脉旁路移植术治疗重症冠心病的对比分析

目的：探讨重症冠心病患者非体外循环下冠状动脉旁路移植术（OPCAB）的可行性和优越性。方法：回顾性分析425例重症冠心病的冠状动脉旁路移植术临床资料。其中非体外循环下冠状动脉旁路移植术（OPCAB组）268例,占63．1％;常规体外循环下冠状动脉旁路移植术（CCABG组）157例。比较两组术后早期死亡率及合并症的发生情况。结果：OPCAB组搭桥（4．09±0．75）支／人,CCABG组搭桥（4．17±0．86）支／人（P〉0．05）。两组新发心房纤颤、围术期心肌梗塞、肾功能不全、肺部并发症发生率差异无显著性（P〉0．05）。与CCABG组比较,OPCAB组手术死亡率、呼吸机使用时间、ICU停留时间、术后输血量、二次开胸率、神经系统并发症发生率明显降低或减少（P〈0．05～〈0．01）。结论：非体外循环下冠状动脉旁路移植术在重症冠心病患者中安全可行,临床效果好。     

Rescue percutaneous coronary intervention early after coronary artery bypass grafting in the drug-eluting stent era

Ten patients underwent rescue percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction or ischemia soon after coronary artery bypass grafting, and 6 received drug-eluting stents (DESs). Outcomes were limited primarily by bleeding events. There was 1 episode of DES thrombosis after antiplatelet therapy was discontinued due to gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Rescue percutaneous coronary intervention is a feasible approach to reestablish coronary perfusion in the perioperative period, but DESs should be used only after appropriate risk stratification for potential bleeding complications that may require the withdrawal of antiplatelet therapy.     

一站式复合再血管化与经皮冠状动脉介入术治疗冠状动脉多支病变中期造影随访研究

目的 通过冠状动脉造影比较＂一站式＂复合再血管化技术（Hybrid技术）与经皮冠状动脉介入术（PCI）治疗冠状动脉多支病变的靶血管及旁路通畅率.方法 2007年6月至2009年12月我院实施＂一站式＂复合再血管化104例,冠状动脉介入治疗7165例.研究病例分为两组,Hybrid组和PCI组.入选标准：①合并前降支（LAD）病变的冠状动脉多支病变患者;②随访期间无胸痛等不适主诉、无心血管不良事件、无住院治疗、症状药物控制良好的患者;③外科术者和介入术者均为经验丰富的医生.按照上述标准,电话随访同意接受造影复查的患者Hybrid组102例,PCI组157例.2010年10月至2011年12月,50例Hybrid患者完成造影复查;采用倾向性评分1∶1匹配的统计方法抽取PCI组患者50例,完成冠状动脉造影检查.研究终点是两组患者冠状动脉造影随访的靶血管通畅率及二次血运重建率.结果 Hybrid组和PCI组各50例,随访时间分别为（18.0±8.0）个月和（19.3±9.1）个月.两组患者基线特征差异无统计学意义.Hybrid组LIMA-LAD旁路通畅率显著高于PCI组LAD靶血管通畅率（98%比80%,P＝0.004）;Hybrid组的LIMA旁路二次血运重建率显著低于PCI组LAD靶血管二次血运重建率（2%比20%,P＝0.008）.结论 ＂一站式＂复合再血管化技术使冠状动脉多支病变能获得良好的中期靶血管通畅率,其LIMA-LAD旁路通畅率显著优于PCI技术前降支药物洗脱支架通畅率.     

Stenting of unprotected left main coronary artery in patients with low preoperative risk of coronary artery bypass grafting

INTRODUCTION: Available data indicate that stenting of the left main coronary artery (LMN) is safe and effective. Restenosis remains the main factor limiting the effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). AIM: To evaluate immediate and long-term results of treatment of patients with LMN disease and low preoperative risk of coronary artery bypass grafting. METHODS: Coronary stents were implanted into LMN in 64 patients. The following strategy was applied: drug eluting stent (DES) for LMN diameter < or =3.5 mm (28 subjects) and bare metal stent (BMS) for LMN diameter >3.5 mm (36 subjects). Patients enrolled in the study underwent clinical evaluation and coronary angiography. Immediate effect of the procedure and main adverse cardiac events were assessed: death, myocardial infarction and additional target lesion or non-target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: Angiographic and clinical effectiveness of the interventions was 100%. Full revascularisation of ischaemic regions of the myocardium was performed. Mean clinical follow-up period was 9.4+/-4.0 months. Neither death nor myocardial infarction occurred. Additional PCIs were performed in 11 (17.2%) patients; however, target vessel revascularisation (TVR) rate within LMN was 9.4% (i.e. 6 subjects with BMS), and non-TVR rate was 7.8% (5 subjects). CONCLUSIONS: LMN stenting is associated with high effectiveness of PCI in patients with low operative risk. Long-term follow-up revealed low incidence of major adverse cardiac events. Strategy of selective use of DESs in the study group produced good clinical outcome. Multivessel disease with LMN stenosis was associated with high rate of additional revascularisation of other vessels. Further improvement of treatment results may be obtained by more common use of DES for multivessel disease and LMN diameters larger than 4.0 mm.     

Early outcome of treatment of ostial de novo left anterior descending coronary artery lesions with drug-eluting stents

We investigated early and mid-term clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients who had de novo ostial left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) lesions that were treated with drug-eluting stents (DESs) or bare metal stents (BMSs). We identified 43 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous intervention for isolated de novo ostial LAD lesions with implantation of DESs and compared them with 43 patients who had similar lesions that were treated with BMSs. All stents were successfully implanted. There were no significant differences with respect to major in-hospital complications between the 2 groups. One patient in the BMS group died during hospitalization. Non-Q-wave myocardial infarction occurred in 2 patients (4.7%) in the DES and in 1 patient (2.3%) in the BMS group. At 9-month follow-up, 3 patients (7%) in the DES group and 11 (25.6%) in the BMS group underwent target lesion revascularization (p = 0.038); major adverse cardiac events were less frequent in the DES than in the BMS group (9.3% vs 32.6%, p = 0.015). Angiographic follow-up was available in 82% of patients in the DES group and 75% of those in the BMS group (p = 0.6) and showed lower binary restenotic rates (5.7% vs 31.3%, p = 0.01) and smaller late loss (0.30 +/- 0.81 vs 1.23 +/- 0.93 mm, p = 0.0001) in the DES group. In conclusion, DES implantation in de novo ostial LAD lesions appears safe and effective and is associated with a significant decrease in restenotic rates compared with historical experience with BMSs.