介入治疗在无保护左主干病变中的应用——对不能耐受旁路移植术或手术高危患者的疗效

目的　探讨经皮冠状动脉介入治疗 (PCI)在不能耐受冠状动脉旁路移植术 (CABG)或手术高危的无保护左主干病变 (UPL MT)患者中的应用及近、远期疗效。方法　自 1993年 2月至 2 0 0 2年 8月期间 ,对 85例被列为不能耐受 CABG或手术高危的 UPL MT进行了 PCI治疗 ,其中定向斑块旋切术 (DCA) 4 8例 ,支架术 37例。术后半年内每月至少门诊复查一次 ,以后定期随诊、电话随访。术后 3、6、12月行冠状动脉造影复查。结果　 PCI术均获技术成功(术后残余直径狭窄 <5 0 % ,且获得 TIMI3级血流 )。住院期间主要不良心脏事件 (MACE)共 12例 (14 .1% ) :死亡9例 (10 .6 % ) ,其中心源性死亡 3例 (3.5 % ) ;再次 PCI术 3例 (3.5 % ) ;无 Q波心肌梗死、急诊 CABG。术后半年随访发现死亡共 15例 (17.6 % ) ,其中心源性死亡 8例 (9.4 % ) ;半年内共有 71例患者接受冠状动脉造影复查 ,其中对19例 (2 6 .8% )进行了靶血管重建 ;对资料完整的 6 4例患者作左心室射血分数 (L VEF)对比分析 ,结果显示 :PCI术后 (3或 /和 6个月 ) L VEF较术前显著改善 (5 .5± 8.7% ,P<0 .0 5 )。Kaplan- Meier生存分析显示 :PCI术后 1年、3年 (免于死亡 )的生存率为 81.2 %、76 .5 % ,免于心源性死亡的生存率为 90 .6 %、89.4 % ,免于心脏事件的生     

老年人无保护左主干病变经桡动脉途径介入治疗

目的探讨经桡动脉途径PCI在老年人无保护左主干病变(UPLMT)中的疗效和安全性。方法65岁以上的UPLMT患者28例择期行PCI,其中开口部6例,体部4例,分叉部18例,所有患者均置入药物洗脱支架。术后每半个月或1个月门诊复查1次,其中19例患者3～6个月行冠状动脉造影复查。结果28例患者PCI均取得成功,术后达TIMI3级血流,住院期间主要不良心脏事件1例,冠状动脉造影复查显示,支架内再狭窄1例(5.3%),再次行PCI。术后平均随访(18.6±2.7)个月,随访1年内无死亡。结论选择性经桡动脉老年UPLMT患者行PCI即刻成功率高,其近中期疗效可以被接受。     

左主干病变不同治疗方法的疗效分析

目的　观察不同治疗方法对冠心病左主干病变患者的近期或远期疗效的影响。方法　对我院 1993年至 1998年期间的 10 5 5例冠心病患者分别进行药物治疗、经皮冠状动脉介入术 (PCI)或冠状动脉旁路移植术 (CABG)治疗 ,于 2 0 0 1年 3至 5月对上述患者进行随访 ,平均随访时间 (3 16±1 2 8)年。观察终点包括死亡、非致死性心肌梗死以及再次行心肌血运重建术 (PCI和CABG)。其中左主干病变为 4 2例 ,男 31例 (79 2 % ) ,女 11例。结果　 4 2例左主干病变采用PCI的占 16 6 7% ,CABG占 38 10 % ,药物治疗占 4 5 2 3%。PCI和CABG两组 (n =2 3) ,随访结果均无死亡和心肌梗死 ,药物治疗组 (n =19)有 3例死亡 ,1例急性心肌梗死 (P <0 0 5 )。PCI组有 1例于术后 2个月因心绞痛复发而复查冠状动脉造影 ,结果显示原病变部位发生再狭窄 ,故再次进行冠状动脉搭桥术。单纯药物治疗组有 1例在随访期间行CABG ,两组间的血运重建率没有差异。结论　冠状动脉血运重建对于左主干病变的患者可提高远期生存率 ,减少终点事件的发生。     

应用切割球囊预扩张后置入金属裸支架治疗冠状动脉开口病变的4年临床随访

目的探讨应用切割球囊预扩张后置入金属裸支架治疗冠状动脉开口病变的远期临床疗效.方法对66例有冠状动脉开口病变的患者行切割球囊预扩张后置入金属裸支架,并对上述患者进行了6～8个月的冠状动脉造影随访和4年的临床随访.66例中冠状动脉主干开口病变9例,前降支开口病变50例,回旋支和右冠脉动脉开口病变各为3例和4例.按照切割球囊与血管直径1∶1的原则,选择切割球囊的大小.结果66例患者中完成经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)术后6～8个月冠状动脉造影随访者38例,造影随访率为57.6%,其中9例发生支架内再狭窄.66例中完成4年临床随访55例,其中死亡2例,1例于冠状动脉旁路移植(CABG)术后死亡,1例死于肺癌,发生非Q波心肌梗死2例,均由支架内严重再狭窄所致,经再次PCI治疗成功.4年间行血管重建术8例,其中再次PCI 4例,行CABG 4例,总计心脏事件发生率为16.4%(9/55).结论本研究显示切割球囊预扩张后置入金属裸支架有良好的近远期效果,未发现有晚期血栓形成致心脏事件的证据.     

小血管支架术290例临床疗效观察

目的　观察小血管支架术手术成功率、术后即刻效果、术后主要临床不良事件发生情况及远期再狭窄率。方法　观察我院 1997年 4月至 2 0 0 2年 3月所纳入的 2 90例小血管支架患者的 2 99支血管 30 4处病变共 316个小血管支架 (支架直径 <3 0mm)术后的手术成功率 ,术后即刻效果 ,主要临床不良事件发生情况及远期再狭窄率。随访 1个月至 4年 ,其中 12 2例行冠状动脉造影术复查。结果　手术成功率 10 0 % ,支架全部顺利置入。血管狭窄率由 89%± 12 %改善至术后的 5 %± 5 % (直径法 ) ,术后 1个月随访 2 0 2例( 6 9 7% ) ,存活 197例 ,5例于术后 3h～ 7d死亡。 2例死于术后持续低血压 ,1例死于急性左心衰 ,2例猝死。 180例随访 5个月至 4年 ,无事件存活率 (NES) 73 3% ( 132 / 180 )。其中 12 2例行冠状动脉造影复查 ,39例发生支架内再狭窄( 30 3% ) ,37例二次行PCI,2例行CABG ,再狭窄患者中 2例二次PCI后再次发作心绞痛 ,经冠脉造影证实再次再狭窄1例行第 3次PTCA ,1例行CABG。 1例患者术后 2年死于心衰 ,1例术后 3年再发急性心肌梗死 (为支架术相关动脉 )。结论　小血管支架术手术成功率高 ,术后即刻效果好 ,术后主要不良事件率 (死亡、AMI及TLR)未增高 ,术后远期无事件存活率较高 ,再狭窄率较大血管支架     

32例急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死急诊介入治疗临床观察

目的评价急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)患者急诊介入治疗的临床疗效及安全性。方法2005年6月～2008年9月共32例急性ST段抬高型心肌梗死在我院行急诊直接PCI治疗,观察介入治疗效果,患者主要心脏不良事件(MACE,包括死亡、非致命性再梗死、靶血管再血管化治疗)的发生率。结果PCI成功率为87.5%,术后住院期间死亡2例,MACE发生率为6.25%;出院后临床随访30例患者,随访时间3～39个月,无死亡和再发心肌梗死发生,5例患者在术后10～12月时行冠状动脉造影复查,未发现支架内再狭窄。结论急性STEMI患者行急诊直接PCI治疗,有较好的临床疗效,在充分给予阿司匹林、氯吡格雷和肝素进行抗血小板和抗凝治疗基础上,联合使用替罗非班可显著降低直接PCI术后不良心脏事件的发生。     

旁路移植术和介入治疗无保护左主干病变的疗效分析

目的:分析无保护左主干病变(ULMCA)经外科旁路移植术(CABG)和冠状动脉介入术(PCI)治疗的临床效果。方法:回顾性分析ULMCA196例,其中PCI95例,CABG105例,比较2组围术期并发症,左心室大小和心功能,主要心血管事件(MACE)。结果:围术期死亡:PCI组4例,占4.4%,CABG组8例,占7.6%;主动脉球囊反搏使用:PCI组12例(13.2%),CABG组23例(22.0%);MACE:PCI组15例(16.5%),CABG组22例(21.0%),P<0.05;平均随访(13±5)个月,PCI组死亡3例,免于MACE77.6%,MACE19例(22.4%),CABG组死亡3例,免于MACE87.6%,MACE12例(12.4%),射血分数改变PCI组1.2%±0.7%,CABG组2.3%±1.1%,P<0.05;左心室舒张末期直径大小变化PCI组(3.5±0.2)mm,CABG组(4.6±0.7)mm,P<0.03,纽约心功能分级PCI组(2.5±0.6)级,CABG组(1.5±0.3)级,P<0.02。结论:PCI和CABG术对ULMCA治疗都有较好的近、远期结果,但围术期PCI疗效优于CABG,对左主干累及分叉病变,CABG则优于PCI。     

冠状动脉旁路移植术后移植血管再狭窄及介入治疗研究

目的　探讨冠状动脉旁路移植 (CABG)术后移植血管病变的特征及介入治疗的效果。　方法　CABG术后的 4 3例 (男性 37例 ,女性 6例 )患者 ,因心绞痛或心力衰竭而接受冠状动脉造影复查。行多体位投照 ,发现移植血管病变特征。获得家属书面同意书后 ,行支架置入术。术后即刻进入临床随访 ,记录心脏事件发生次数 ,术后 6个月时进行冠状动脉造影。　结果　再次出现心绞痛距CABG术的时间平均为 13 7(3～ 19)个月 ,复查冠状动脉造影距旁路移植术的时间为 2 1(6～ 2 4 )个月。总计桥血管 12 1根 ,其中动脉桥 12根 (10 % ) ,静脉桥 10 9根 (90 % )。 5例 <6 0岁患者计 9根桥(1 8个桥 /例 ) ,38例≥ 6 0岁患者计 112根 (3 0个桥 /例 )。CABG术后 3例 (7 2 % )发生院内急性心肌梗死。心脏超声测得患者左心室射血分数由CABG术前 (34 6± 11 5 ) %增加到 (46 2± 10 5 ) %(P <0 0 5 )。无动脉桥体狭窄 ,1例动脉桥远端吻合口狭窄 (8 3% ) ,1例动脉桥失败后改用静脉桥。10 9根静脉桥中 ,桥病变总数 4 8根 (44 0 % ) ,其中 17根桥狭窄并血栓形成 (35 4 % ) ,31根静脉桥闭塞 (6 4 6 % ) ,闭塞位于开口后 1～ 2mm处 ,前降支和右冠状动脉的静脉桥闭塞数量 (均为 14根 ,4 5 2 % )明显多于回旋支静脉桥 (     

冠状动脉旁路移植术患者桥血管闭塞自身血管病变介入治疗

目的 探讨对冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)后桥血管闭塞患者自身冠状动脉行经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的疗效.方法 2003年6月至2007年6月135例CABG后,再次出现心绞痛且1支或2支桥血管闭塞患者入选.患者CABG后至复查冠状动脉造影时间为4～89(平均33.8±23.5)个月.移植血管共318支,闭塞146支,其中左内乳动脉(LIMA)闭塞29支(29/128),占22.7%,大隐静脉桥闭塞117支(117/188),占62.2%.自身靶血管146支,靶病变158处,均为B2或C型病变,其中在45例患者有47处慢性完全闭塞病变(CTO)(47/158),占29.7%.结果 对135例患者共158处自身冠状动脉靶病变进行PCI,其中对45例患者的47处CTO进行了PCI,共置入310枚药物洗脱支架(DES),未置入裸支架.总病例成功率为96.3%(130/135),病变成功率为96.8%(153/158).术后住院期间所有患者均无主要临床并发症发生.术后12个月再狭窄率5.6%(5/89),靶血管重建率5.4%(7/130),心脏不良事件发生率为6.2%(8/130).结论 对CABG后桥血管闭塞患者自身冠状动脉行PCI成功率高,并发症发生率低、疗效好.     

冠心病患者介入治疗失败后行急诊冠状动脉旁路移植术的预后

目的 探讨冠心病患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗失败后行急诊冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的预后.方法回顾性分析2002年1月至2010年12月阜外心血管病医院11例经皮冠状动脉介入治疗失败后行急诊CABG患者的临床资料,并进行随访.院内随访内容包括心脏性死亡、Q波心肌梗死、肾功能不全、神经系统事件;院外随访的研究终点为主要心血管不良事件,包括死亡、心肌梗死和靶病变血管重建.结果 患者年龄(61±5)岁.冠状动脉造影显示三支病变患者5例(45.5％).在介入治疗的靶血管病变中,9例(81.8％)位于左前降支,中、重度钙化、慢性完全闭塞及弥漫性长病变分别为3例(27.3％)、4例(36.4％)和4例(36.4％).11例患者均有行急诊CABG的指征,其中冠状动脉夹层5例(45.5％)、冠状动脉穿孔 3例(27.3％)、病变无法充分扩张1例(9.1％)、血管急性闭塞1例(9.1％)和支架脱载1例(9.1％).CABG术后随访(47±33)个月.院内随访期间,发生心脏性死亡1例(9.1％),Q波心肌梗死2例(18.2％).院外随访期间,1例(9.1％)患者死于肾功能衰竭,无因心原性事件再次住院的患者.结论经皮冠状动脉介入治疗失败后行急诊CABG多见于复杂冠状动脉病变,术后患者的长期预后良好.     

药物洗脱支架在冠心病无保护左主干病变中的应用

目的评价药物洗脱支架治疗经选择冠心病无保护左主干病变的安全性和有效性。方法2003年1月~2005年6月间,共有48例经选择的冠心病患者,年龄39~81岁,经冠状动脉造影证实为无保护左主干病变(左主干狭窄均≥75%)行介入治疗置入药物洗脱支架。结果48例患者介入治疗均获得成功,共置入药物洗脱支架75枚(51 Cypher,18 Taxus,6 Firebird)。其中左主干开口部狭窄5例(10.4%,5/48),体部狭窄6例(12.5%,6/48),远端分叉部位狭窄37例(77.1%,37/48)。37例远端分叉部位狭窄患者中,主支支架加边支经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)10例,双支架术27例,最后成功对吻球囊扩张30例(81.1%,30/37)。所有患者治疗后临床症状明显缓解或消失,住院及6个月随访期间无严重心血管事件发生,43例患者术后6个月行冠状动脉造影随访,2例患者再狭窄(均为分叉病变)行冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG),冠状动脉造影随访率89.6%,再狭窄率4.7%。结论药物洗脱支架介入治疗冠心病无保护左主干病变安全有效,近中期效果良好。     

Initial and long-term results of directional coronary atherectomy in unprotected left main coronary artery

Angioplasty in the unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) has been controversial. Recently, several studies have suggested that new procedures and devices such as directional coronary atherectomy (DCA) and stents may change this situation. Although there are many reports of unprotected LMCA stenting, there are few reports of DCA of this lesion. Therefore, initial and long-term results were evaluated in 101 patients who underwent DCA for unprotected LMCA in our hospital. Emergency procedures were performed in 15 patients and electively in 86 patients. Scheduled angiographic follow-up was routinely performed, and all patients were clinically followed for >4 months after DCA. Technical success was achieved in 99%, and in-hospital outcomes were cardiac death (2%), noncardiac death (4%), Q-wave myocardial infarction (1%), non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (8.9%), coronary artery bypass grafting (0%), and repeat angioplasty (4%). In-hospital results varied considerably, depending on presentation. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in the emergency, left ventricular ejection fraction < or =35%, and high-risk surgical subgroups. The angiographic restenosis rate was 20.4% at follow-up, and its predictor was postminimal lumen diameter by multivariate analysis. Mean clinical follow-up was 2.8 years; estimated 1- and 3-year survival rates were 87% and 80.7%, respectively. The cardiac survival rate of the low-risk surgical subgroup was significantly higher than that of the high-risk surgical subgroup (p <0.05). Thus, our data show that DCA can be performed safely and effectively in unprotected LMCA with an acceptable low restenosis rate and high survival rate.     

Stenting of Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenoses: Immediate and Late Outcomes

Objectives. We examined the immediate and long-term outcomes after stenting of unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenoses in patients with normal left ventricular (LV) function.Background. Left main coronary artery disease is regarded as an absolute contraindication for coronary angioplasty. Recently, several reports on protected or unprotected LMCA stenting, or both, suggested the possibility of percutaneous intervention for this prohibited area.Methods. Forty-two consecutive patients with unprotected LMCA stenoses and normal LV function were treated with stents. The post-stent antithrombotic regimens were aspirin and ticlopidine; 14 patients also received warfarin. Patients were followed very closely with monthly telephone interviews and follow-up angiography at 6 months.Results. The procedural success rate was 100%, with no episodes of subacute thrombosis regardless of anticoagulation regimen. Six-month follow-up angiography was performed in 32 of 34 eligible patients. Angiographic restenosis occurred in seven patients (22%, 95% confidence interval 7% to 37%); five patients subsequently underwent elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG), and two patients were treated with rotational atherectomy plus adjunct balloon angioplasty. The only death occurred 2 days after elective CABG for treatment of in-stent restenosis. The other patients (without angiographic follow-up) remain asymptomatic.Conclusions. Stenting of unprotected LMCA stenoses may be a safe and effective alternative to CABG in carefully selected patients with normal LV function. Further studies in larger patient populations are needed to assess late outcome.     

Unprotected left main coronary artery stenting: immediate and medium-term outcomes of 140 elective procedures

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate immediate and late outcomes after stenting for left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. BACKGROUND: Conventional percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA), for which coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been the gold standard therapy for years, has yielded poor results in unprotected LMCA lesions. The development of coronary stents, together with their dramatic patency improvement provided by new antiplatelet regimens and their validation against restenosis, warrants a reappraisal of angioplasty in LMCA stenosis. METHODS: From January 1993 to September 1998, 140 consecutive unselected patients with unprotected LMCA stenosis underwent elective stenting. Group I included 47 high-CABG-risk patients, and group II included 93 low-CABG-risk patients. Ticlopidine without aspirin was routinely started at least 72 h before the procedure and continued for one month. Patients were reevaluated monthly. A follow-up angiography was requested after six months. RESULTS: The procedure success rate was 100%. One-month mortality was 9% (4/47) in group I and 0% in group II. A follow-up angiography was obtained in 82% of cases, and target lesion revascularization was required in 17.4%. One-year actuarial survival was 89% in the first 29 group I patients and 97.5% in the first 63 group II patients. CONCLUSIONS: Stenting of unprotected LMCA stenosis provided excellent immediate results, particularly in good CABG candidates. Medium-term results were good, with a restenosis rate of 23%, similar to that seen after stenting at other coronary sites. Stenting deserves to be considered a safe and effective alternative to CABG in institutions performing large numbers of PTCAs.     

Stent in protected and non-protected left main coronary artery: results and short-term follow-up

We examined the immediate and short-term outcomes after stenting protected and unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenoses, in patients with normal ventricular function. Left main coronary artery disease is regarded as an absolute contraindication for coronary angioplasty, because it has been associated with high procedural morbidity and poor mid-term results. Between february 1995 and february 1999, 596 procedures were performed in 468 patients. Ten patients who had disease involving the left main coronary artery were included. They were not candidates for coronary surgery. The post-stent antithrombotic regimens were aspirin and ticlopidine. The procedural success rate was 100% without episodes of subacute thrombosis. Three to six months follow-up angiography was performed in all, restenosis occurred only in two patients, there were two repeat PTCA (20%) and there were no deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Stenting of unprotected and protected left main coronary artery stenoses may be a safe and effective alternative to surgery in carefully selected patients with normal left ventricular function. The results of our study suggests that when patients have prohibitive surgical risks, elective LMCA angioplasty and/or stenting maybe undertaken with a high procedural success rate as an effective alternative to CABG in carefully selected patients. Further studies in larger patient populations are needed to assess late outcome.     

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: in-hospital and one year outcome after emergent and elective treatments

This study attempts to compare the risks and benefits of provisional stenting with drug eluting stents and bypass surgery for left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. Recent improvements in interventional technologies have increased interest in percutaneous treatment of LMCA stenosis. However, application of percutaneous techniques to LMCA has been sporadic and controversial. In-hospital and one year outcomes of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) cases were compared. From September, 2003 to June, 2005, a total of 59 consecutive patients with de novo unprotected LMCA stenosis were treated with either CABG or PCI. Twenty patients received non-intravascular ultrasound-guided PCI with a stent in the LMCA. Thirty-nine patients underwent CABG. At 30-day follow-up, the major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACE) rates of mortality, myocardial infarction, cerebral vascular accident, and target vessel revascularization were 25.6% in the CABG group and 5% in the PCI group (P=0.054). At one year follow-up, the MACE rates were 33.3% in the CABG group and 5% in the PCI group. One year MACE for the CABG group significantly differed from that of the PCI group (P=0.015). The odds ratio (OR) of one year MACE-free survival was 0.75 (P<0.001) in the CABG group versus the PCI group. Further analysis demonstrated there was a significant difference in in-hospital MACE and one year MACE between the elective CABG group and elective PCI group (P=0.045). However, there was no significant difference between the emergent CABG group and emergent PCI group (P=1.000 for in-hospital MACE; P=0.486 for one year MACE). PCI on unprotected LM offers an alternative option in patients with high surgical risk and appropriate lesion morphology.     

One-year clinical outcomes of protected and unprotected left main coronary artery stenting.

AIMS: To evaluate outcomes for left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenting and compare results between protected (left coronary grafted) and unprotected LMCA stenting in the current bare-metal stent era. METHODS: We reviewed outcomes among 142 consecutive patients who underwent protected or unprotected LMCA stenting since 1997. All-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target-lesion revascularization (TLR), and the combined major adverse clinical event (MACE) rates at one year were computed. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients (70%) underwent protected and 43 patients (30%) underwent unprotected LMCA stenting. In the unprotected group, 86% were considered poor surgical candidates. Survival at one year was 88% for all patients, TLR 20%, and MACE 32%. At one year, survival was reduced in the unprotected group (72% vs. 95%, P<0.001) and MACE was increased in the unprotected patients (49% vs. 25%, P=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: In the current era, stenting for both protected and unprotected LMCA disease is still associated with high long-term mortality and MACE rates. Stenting for unprotected LMCA disease in a high-risk population should only be considered in the absence of other revascularization options. Further studies are needed to evaluate the role of stenting for unprotected LMCA disease.     

A prospective study of elective stenting in unprotected left main coronary disease

The standard treatment of left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease has been bypass surgery (CABG). Recent reports suggested that stenting of LMCA disease might be feasible. From January 1995 to April 1998, we carried out a prospective study of elective stenting of unprotected LMCA disease to evaluate its immediate and long-term results. Of 61 consecutive patients with unprotected LMCA disease, 6 were excluded. Acute procedural success was 100% for the remaining 55 patients, without any complications such as stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, CABG, or death. During a mean follow-up of 16.1 ± 9.6 months, 11 patients (20%) had symptomatic recurrence, between 2 to 6 months after their procedure. Seven patients underwent CABG, two had repeat intervention, one continued with medical therapy, and one died before planned angiography. There was no late sudden death. Forty-four patients (80%) remained asymptomatic. We conclude that elective stenting may be a safe alternative to CABG in unprotected LMCA disease. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Intervent. 46:153–159, 1999. © 1999 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Comparison of outcomes of unprotected left main versus multivessel coronary artery interventions

Left main coronary artery (LMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has emerged as an appealing alternative to bypass surgery for significant LMCA disease, especially in high-risk candidates. PCI for unprotected LMCA stenosis is currently designated a class IIb indication. Direct comparisons between unprotected LMCA PCI and multivessel PCI are lacking. We aimed to determine the incremental risk associated with unprotected LMCA PCI compared to multivessel PCI. We queried the Cleveland Clinic PCI database to identify patients who underwent unprotected LMCA PCI from 2003 through 2009 and compared these to patients undergoing multivessel PCI in the same period. Patients undergoing PCI for acute myocardial infarction were excluded. Mortality was derived using the Social Security Death Index. Short-term (≤30-day) mortality rates in the LMCA PCI group (n = 468, 1.9%) were similar to the death rate in the multivessel PCI group (n = 1,973, 1.3%, p = 0.3). There was no significant difference in adjusted mortality between the 2 study groups. Stratifying LMCA PCI by the number of concomitant vessel territories treated, there was no significant difference in mortality in any LMCA PCI category (LMCA only, LMCA + 1-vessel PCI, LMCA + multivessel PCI) compared to multivessel PCI. In conclusion, there was comparable short-term and long-term mortality in the LMCA PCI and multivessel PCI groups. LMCA stenting did not appear to incur incremental risk compared to multivessel PCI.