Percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass grafting in the treatment of unprotected left main stenosis: updated 5-year outcomes from the randomised, non-inferiority NOBLE trial

Prognostic Value of Sex After Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Disease

Background

Female subjects have poorer outcomes in left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease compared with male subjects. However, limited information is available on the long-term prognostic impact of sex and sex–treatment interactions in patients with LMCA disease undergoing coronary revascularization.

Objectives

The goal of this study was to investigate the long-term effects of sex and related differential outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in LMCA disease.

Methods

The extended PRECOMBAT (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) trial evaluated the >10-year clinical outcomes in patients with LMCA disease randomized to undergo PCI with drug-eluting stents (n = 300) or CABG (n = 300). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization) at 10 years.

Results

Of the 600 patients, 459 (76.5%) were male. The 10-year rates of MACCE were similar between male and female subjects in the overall cohort (27.3% vs 27.0%; adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70-1.59), the PCI arm (30.6% vs 27.1%; aHR: 1.19; 95% CI: 0.69-2.05), and the CABG arm (24.0% vs 26.9%; aHR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.53-1.62). The 10-year risks for MACCE did not significantly differ between PCI and CABG in both male (aHR: 1.37; 95% CI: 0.95-1.97) and female (aHR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.56-2.07) subjects. There was no significant sex–treatment interaction regarding the adjusted risk of MACCE at 10 years (P for interaction = 0.52).

Conclusions

In this 10-year follow-up of the PRECOMBAT trial, there was no sex-related impact on the long-term risk of MACCE after PCI and CABG for LMCA disease. (Ten-Year Outcomes of PRECOMBAT Trial; NCT03871127)

Impact of Body Mass Index on Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Undergoing Septal Myectomy

Background Obesity is an established cardiovascular risk factor in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) is one of the most common complications after surgery in patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (OHCM). We aimed to determine the impact of body mass index (BMI) on the occurrence of POAF in patients with OHCM who underwent septal myectomy. Methods and Results In all, 712 OHCM patients without previous atrial fibrillation who underwent septal myectomy were identified. Patients were stratified into 3 groups based on BMI. Of these, 224 (31.5%) had normal weight (BMI<24 kg/m²), 339 (47.6%) were overweight (BMI, 24 to <28 kg/m²), and 149 (20.9%) were obese (BMI≥28 kg/m²). Overweight and obese patients had increased levels of left atrial diameter (P<0.001) and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (P<0.001), compared with patients with normal weight. Among 184 patients (25.8%) developing POAF, 32 cases (14.3%) occurred in the normal weight group, 100 cases (29.5%) occurred in the overweight group, and 52 cases (34.9%) occurred in the obese group (P<0.001). Logistic regression analysis indicated that overweight (odds ratio [OR]: 2.161, 95% CI, 1.333-3.503; P=0.002) or obesity (OR, 2.803; 95% CI, 1.589-4.944; P<0.001), age (OR, 1.037; 95% CI, 1.018-1.057; P<0.001), and left atrial diameter (OR, 1.060; 95% CI, 1.027-1.095; P<0.001) were independently associated with the occurrence of POAF in patients with OHCM. Conclusions Overweight and obesity are strong predictors of POAF in patients with OHCM. Strategies aimed at lowering BMI may be a potential way to prevent POAF.

Real-World Treatment Selection Factors and 7-Year Clinical Outcomes between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery in Left Main Disease

Background: The decision-making factors and long-term clinical outcomes between PCI and CABG in left main (LM) disease are still not well defined in the real world. Methods: We evaluated consecutive patients (n = 230) with LM disease either treated by PCI (n = 118) or CABG (n = 112). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiac death, spontaneous myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and target vessel revascularization (TVR) for 7 years. Results: In the multivariate-adjusted analysis, the presence of intermediate EuroSCORE II and high SYNTAX scores predisposed to CABG. Isolated LM disease was associated with receiving PCI. The PCI group had a similar rate of MACE (HRadj 0.97, 95% CI [0.48–1.94], p = 0.92) and a lower tendency of hard MACE (HRadj 0.49, 95% CI [0.22–1.07], p = 0.07) compared to the CABG group, mainly due to the balance between a higher rate of TVR (HRadj 9.71, p = 0.02) and a lower rate of stroke (HRadj 0.22, p = 0.09) with the PCI group than in the CABG group. Conclusions: The decision making of treatment strategy was made based on clinical and angiographic factors. The selected patients who received PCI showed similar MACE and trend of a lower rate of composite hard endpoints despite multivariate adjustment.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The guideline for coronary artery revascularization replaces the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines, providing a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Coronary artery disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Coronary revascularization is an important therapeutic option when managing patients with coronary artery disease. The 2021 coronary artery revascularization guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with coronary artery disease who are being considered for coronary revascularization, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests.

PCI or CABG for Left Main Disease: Does Disease Location Matter?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review attempts to specifically assess impact of disease location in left main artery on mortality and cardiovascular outcomes in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

The management of left main disease, once thought to be the sole province of cardiothoracic surgeon, has recently undergone a reappraisal by the cardiovascular medicine community. For many years, societal guideline recommendations advised bypass surgery as the "de rigeur" method of revascularization for unprotected left main disease. However, recent studies suggest that coronary intervention, especially with advances in drug-eluting stent technology, has mounted a serious challenge to surgical bypass in treatment of this disease. Although overall mortality rates are comparable for percutaneous coronary intervention and bypass surgery, left main disease location does influence long-term outcomes for percutaneous coronary intervention more than bypass surgery. A patient- and lesion-centered approach to treatment of this disease may provide optimal outcomes.

Coronary revascularisation outcome questionnaire: validation study of the Serbian version

PURPOSE

To translate, culturally adapt and validate the Coronary Revascularisation Outcome Questionnaire (CROQ), a disease-specific tool for measuring health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with ischaemic heart disease (IHD), into Serbian language (CROQ-S).

METHODS

Validation study was performed at the Clinic for Cardiac Surgery and Clinic for Cardiology, University Clinical Centre of Serbia. We included a convenience sample of 600 patients with IHD divided into four groups. Acceptability, reliability and validity of the CROQ-S were assessed.

RESULTS

CROQ-S was acceptable to patients as demonstrated by less than 1% of missing data for each single item. Cronbach's Alpha was higher than the criterion of 0.70 for all scales in each version except the Cognitive Functioning scale which only met this criterion in the CABG pre-revascularisation version. Mean values of item-total correlations were greater than 0.30 for all scales except the Cognitive Functioning scale in both the pre-revascularisation groups. Compared to the original version, exploratory factor analysis in our study showed more factors; however, the majority of items had a factor loading greater than 0.3 on the right scale. Correlations of CROQ-S scales with the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey and Seattle Angina Questionnaire showed the expected pattern whereby scales measuring similar constructs were most highly correlated.

CONCLUSION

CROQ-S is an acceptable, reliable and valid disease-specific instrument for measuring HRQoL in this sample of Serbian speaking patients with IHD both before and after coronary revascularisation. However, the Cognitive Functioning scale did not meet all the psychometric criteria and further validation of its responsiveness is required.

Safety Comparison of Monotherapy Aspirin to Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Following Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

BACKGROUND

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is recommended over single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) in patients following coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The compilation of evidence has focused on the efficacy of DAPT to limit risk of graft occlusion, however the safety, especially in the on-pump CABG population, is less well described. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of DAPT versus SAPT after on-pump CABG.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective cohort analysis of adult patients following isolated on-pump CABG between January 2012 and December 2019 not on oral anticoagulation at discharge. The primary endpoint was occurrence of a composite bleeding event identified by pre-specified ICD codes. Secondary endpoints consisted of 30-day and 1-year mortalities along with individual bleeding components.

RESULTS

Of the 2341 patients included 1250 patients were in the SAPT arm and 1091 patients in the DAPT arm. The study populations differed by age, prior MI, PAD, and CHF status/stage. Bleeding events occurred in a total of 70 patients (3.0%), with 36 patients (2.9%) in the SAPT arm and 34 patients (3.1%) in the DAPT arm (P = .74). 30-day (SAPT 0.7% vs DAPT 0.4%) and 1-year (SAPT 3.3% vs DAPT 2.3%) mortality were not significantly different between groups. The most frequent bleed event was in the gastrointestinal tract.

CONCLUSION

In this study, DAPT was not associated with an increase in composite bleeding compared to SAPT. This study could reduce the barrier to prescribing of DAPT given previous efficacy data.

Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting in left main coronary artery disease: an individual patient data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal revascularisation strategy for patients with left main coronary artery disease is uncertain. We therefore aimed to evaluate long-term outcomes for patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

METHODS

In this individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane database using the search terms "left main", "percutaneous coronary intervention" or "stent", and "coronary artery bypass graft*" to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English between database inception and Aug 31, 2021, comparing PCI with drug-eluting stents with CABG in patients with left main coronary artery disease that had at least 5 years of patient follow-up for all-cause mortality. Two authors (MSS and BAB) identified studies meeting the criteria. The primary endpoint was 5-year all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints were cardiovascular death, spontaneous myocardial infarction, procedural myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeat revascularisation. We used a one-stage approach; event rates were calculated by use of the Kaplan-Meier method and treatment group comparisons were made by use of a Cox frailty model, with trial as a random effect. In Bayesian analyses, the probabilities of absolute risk differences in the primary endpoint between PCI and CABG being more than 0·0%, and at least 1·0%, 2·5%, or 5·0%, were calculated.

FINDINGS

Our literature search yielded 1599 results, of which four RCTs-SYNTAX, PRECOMBAT, NOBLE, and EXCEL-meeting our inclusion criteria were included in our meta-analysis. 4394 patients, with a median SYNTAX score of 25·0 (IQR 18·0-31·0), were randomly assigned to PCI (n=2197) or CABG (n=2197). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of 5-year all-cause death was 11·2% (95% CI 9·9-12·6) with PCI and 10·2% (9·0-11·6) with CABG (hazard ratio 1·10, 95% CI 0·91-1·32; p=0·33), resulting in a non-statistically significant absolute risk difference of 0·9% (95% CI -0·9 to 2·8). In Bayesian analyses, there was an 85·7% probability that death at 5 years was greater with PCI than with CABG; this difference was more likely than not less than 1·0% (<0·2% per year). The numerical difference in mortality was comprised more of non-cardiovascular than cardiovascular death. Spontaneous myocardial infarction (6·2%, 95% CI 5·2-7·3 vs 2·6%, 2·0-3·4; hazard ratio [HR] 2·35, 95% CI 1·71-3·23; p<0·0001) and repeat revascularisation (18·3%, 16·7-20·0 vs 10·7%, 9·4-12·1; HR 1·78, 1·51-2·10; p<0·0001) were more common with PCI than with CABG. Differences in procedural myocardial infarction between strategies depended on the definition used. Overall, there was no difference in the risk of stroke between PCI (2·7%, 2·0-3·5) and CABG (3·1%, 2·4-3·9; HR 0·84, 0·59-1·21; p=0·36), but the risk was lower with PCI in the first year after randomisation (HR 0·37, 0·19-0·69).

INTERPRETATION

Among patients with left main coronary artery disease and, largely, low or intermediate coronary anatomical complexity, there was no statistically significant difference in 5-year all-cause death between PCI and CABG, although a Bayesian approach suggested a difference probably exists (more likely than not <0·2% per year) favouring CABG. There were trade-offs in terms of the risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, and revascularisation. A heart team approach to communicate expected outcome differences might be useful to assist patients in reaching a treatment decision.

FUNDING

No external funding.

Long-Term Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents or Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Multivessel Coronary Disease

More evidence is required with respect to the comparative effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with second-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in contemporary clinical practice. This prospective observational registry-based study compared the outcomes of 6,647 patients with multivessel disease who underwent PCI with second-generation DES (n = 3,858) or CABG (n = 2,789) between January 2006 and June 2018 and for whom follow-up data were available for at least 2 to 13 years (median 4.8). The primary outcome was a composite of death, spontaneous myocardial infarction, or stroke. Baseline differences were adjusted using propensity scores and inverse probability weighting. In the overall cohort, there were no significant between-group differences in the adjusted risks for the primary composite outcome (hazard ratio [HR] for PCI vs CABG 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86 to 1.25, p = 0.73) and all-cause mortality (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.20, p = 0.68). This relative treatment effect on the primary outcome was similar in patients with diabetes (HR 1.15, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.46, p = 0.25) and without diabetes (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.22, p = 0.67) (p for interaction = 0.24). The adjusted risk of the primary outcome was significantly greater after PCI than after CABG in patients with left main involvement (HR 1.39, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.90, p = 0.044), but not in those without left main involvement (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.16, p = 0.56) (p = 0.03 for interaction). In this prospective real-world long-term registry, we observed that the risk for the primary composite of death, spontaneous myocardial infarction, or stroke was similar between PCI with contemporary DES and CABG.

Towards a common pathway for the treatment of left main disease: contemporary evidence and future directions: Left main disease treatment

There is increasing evidence to support percutaneous treatment of left main (LM) disease. Due to its major clinical impact, any procedure in the left main should be meticulously planned and performed. In this review, we aim to integrate the available evidence into a common treatment pathway, starting with understanding the distinct anatomical features of the left main. A three-level decision-making process is presented. First, in instances of angiographic ambiguity, intravascular ultrasound and fractional flow reserve can be used to decide if revascularisation could be deferred. Second, if revascularisation is indicated, the risks and benefits of percutaneous versus surgical procedures should be evaluated. Third, if percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is chosen, the operator should decide between the provisional single-stent versus upfront two-stent strategies. Regardless of the PCI technique selected, it should be performed according to the recommendations of a stepwise procedure utilising proximal optimisation (POT) after each instance of crossover stenting and kissing balloon inflation (KBI) where necessary. In addition to the recognised quality markers such as POT and KBI, we discuss the clinical relevance of the operator's LM PCI experience and the intracoronary imaging guidance when treating patients with left main disease.

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

OBJECTIVES

The 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]).

BACKGROUND

Patients 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.

METHODS

A 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.

RESULTS

A 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).

CONCLUSIONS

In 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.

Prevalence and Impact of High Bleeding Risk in Patients Undergoing Left Main Artery Disease PCI

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and prognostic impact of high bleeding risk (HBR), as determined by the Academic Research Consortium HBR criteria, in real-world patients undergoing left main (LM) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

BACKGROUND

LM PCI is often reserved for patients at increased risk for periprocedural adverse events. Patients at HBR represent a relevant percentage of this cohort, but their outcomes after LM PCI are still poorly investigated.

METHODS

All patients undergoing LM PCI between 2014 and 2017 at a tertiary care center were prospectively enrolled. Patients were defined as having HBR if they met at least 1 major or 2 minor Academic Research Consortium HBR criteria. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke at 12 months.

RESULTS

Among 619 enrolled patients, 55.3% were at HBR. The rate of the primary endpoint was 4-fold higher in patients at HBR compared with those without HBR (20.5% vs 4.9%; HR: 4.43; 95% CI: 2.31-8.48), driven by an increased risk for all-cause death (HR: 3.88; 95% CI: 1.88-8.02) and MI (HR: 6.18; 95% CI: 1.83-20.9). Rates of target vessel or lesion revascularization and stent thrombosis were comparable in the 2 groups. Bleeding occurred more frequently in patients at HBR (HR: 3.77; 95% CI: 1.83-7.76). Consistent findings were observed after Cox multivariable regression adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing LM PCI, those with HBR are at increased risk for all-cause death, MI, and bleeding. Conversely, rates of repeat revascularization and stent thrombosis were comparable, suggesting frailty and comorbidities as primary causes of worse outcomes in patients at HBR.

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

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

Cardiovascular medicine: a year in review

Cardiovascular medicine is facing several challenges in the current era, dominated by the rapid spread of a previously unknown virus around the world. Indeed, the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic set the course of cardiovascular science and education in an extraordinary way, hogging the attention of the medical community. Notably, while COVID-19 impacted research progress, there has been considerable effort in exploring topics of great interest, from the management of acute coronary syndromes to new horizons in the treatment of heart failure, from novelties in the surgical treatment of cardiovascular disease to new data on implantable cardiac devices, and from new diagnostic applications of multimodal imaging techniques to relevant basic science findings. Minerva Cardiology and Angiology, formerly Minerva Cardioangiologica, has strived to inform its readers on these topics and novelties, aiming for a succinct yet poignant melding of timeliness and accuracy. Accordingly, the purpose of this narrative review is to highlight and summarize the major research and review articles published during 2020. In particular, we provide a broad overview of the novelties identifying six major areas of interest in the field of cardiovascular sciences in which new evidences have contributed to improving prevention, diagnosis and treatment of heart and vessels diseases.

High Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Left Main Bifurcation Stenosis in a Peritoneal Dialysis Patient

Complex coronary artery disease is the leading cause of death in patients with end-stage renal disease. We report a case of a patient on peritoneal dialysis, preloaded with Prasugrel and acetylsalicylic acid as а potent dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). The patient underwent a high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) due to bifurcation stenosis of the left main stem branch. A "double kiss crush" bifurcation stenting technique was performed. This case provides additional data about the treatment of this group of patients, a group that is often excluded from randomized control trials, but is frequently encountered in cardiovascular practice. Furthermore, it helps to advance PCI treatment along with exploring the safety of potent DAPT in a group that is susceptible to both ischemia and bleeding, thus presenting a great challenge in the decision for treatment.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Vs Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Disease: G-LM Registry

Coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) has been the standard of care for revascularization for patients with obstructive unprotected left main coronary disease (ULMCA). There have been multiple randomized and registry data demonstrating the technical and clinical efficacy of PCI in certain patients with ULMCA. The purpose of this study is to evaluate clinical outcomes of ULMCA PCI as compared to CABG in patients requiring revascularization in three Gulf countries. All ULMCA cases treated by PCI with DES versus CABG were retrospectively identified from 14 centers in 3 Arab Gulf countries (KSA, UAE, and Bahrain) from January 2015 to December 2019. In total, 2138 patients were included: 1222 were treated with PCI versus 916 with CABG. Patients undergoing PCI were older, and had higher comorbidities and mean European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE). Aborted cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock were reported more in the PCI group at hospital presentation. In addition, lower ejection fractions were reported in the PCI group. In hospital mortality and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) occurred more in patients undergoing CABG than PCI. At median follow-up of 15 months (interquartile range, 30), no difference was observed in freedom from revascularization, MACCE, or total mortality between those treated with PCI and CABG. While findings are similar to Western data registries, continued follow-up will be needed to ascertain whether this pattern continues into latter years.

Ten-Year Trends in Coronary Bifurcation Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Prognostic Effects of Patient and Lesion Characteristics, Devices, and Techniques

Background

Despite advances in devices and techniques, coronary bifurcation lesion remains a challenging lesion subset in the field of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We evaluate 10‐year trends in bifurcation PCI and their effects on patient outcomes.

Methods and Results

We analyzed 10‐year trends in patient/lesion characteristics, devices, PCI strategy, stent optimization techniques, and clinical outcomes using data from 5498 patients who underwent bifurcation PCI from 2004 to 2015. Clinical outcomes 2 years after the index procedure were evaluated in terms of target vessel failure (a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) and a patient‐oriented composite outcome (a composite of all‐cause death, myocardial infarction, and any revascularization). During the 10‐year study period, patient and lesion complexity, such as multivessel disease, diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease, and left main bifurcation, increased continuously (all P<0.001). The risk of target vessel failure or patient‐oriented composite outcome decreased continuously from 2004 to 2015 (target vessel failure: from 12.3% to 6.9%, log‐rank P<0.001; patient‐oriented composite outcome: from 13.6% to 9.3%, log‐rank P<0.001). The use of a second‐generation drug‐eluting stent and decreased target vessel failure risk in true bifurcation lesions were the major contributors to improved patient prognosis (interaction P values were <0.001 and 0.013, respectively).

Conclusions

During the past decade of bifurcation PCI, patient and lesion characteristics, devices, PCI techniques, and patient prognosis have all significantly changed. Despite increased patient and lesion complexity, clinical outcomes after bifurcation PCI have improved, mainly because of better devices and more widespread adoption of procedural optimization techniques and appropriate treatment strategies.

Registration

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT01642992 and NCT03068494.

Percutaneous vs. surgical revascularization for patients with unprotected left main stenosis: a meta-analysis of 5-year follow-up randomized controlled trials

AIMS

A 5-year survival of patients with unprotected left main (ULM) stenosis according to the choice of revascularization (percutaneous vs. surgical) remains to be defined.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) with a follow-up of at least 5 years were included. All-cause death was the primary endpoint. MACCE [a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and repeat revascularization] along with its single components and cardiovascular (CV) death were the secondary ones. Analyses were stratified according to the use of first- vs. last-generation coronary stents. Subgroup comparisons were performed according to SYNTAX score (below or above 33) and to age (using cut-offs of each trial's subgroup analysis). Four RCTs with 4394 patients were identified: 2197 were treated with CABG, 657 with first generation, and 1540 with last-generation stents. At 5-year rates of all-cause death did not differ [odds ratio (OR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-1.21], as those of CV death and stroke. Coronary artery bypass graft reduced rates of MACCE (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60-0.79), mainly driven by MI (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.36-0.65) and revascularization (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.45-0.64). Benefit of CABG for MACCE was consistent, although with different extent, across values of SYNTAX score (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.59-0.97 for values < 32 and OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.47-0.84 for values ≥ 33) while was not evident for 'younger' patients (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.65-1.07 vs. OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51-0.84 for 'older' patients).

CONCLUSION

For patients with ULM disease followed-up for 5 years, no significant difference was observed in all-cause and cardiovascular death between PCI and CABG. Coronary artery bypass graft reduced risk of MI, revascularization, and MACCE especially in older patients and in those with complex coronary disease and a high SYNTAX score.

Left Main Coronary Artery Disease in Diabetics: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting?

The choice between coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for myocardial revascularization in patients with left main disease (LMD) is controversial. There is general agreement that CABG is appropriate for all patients, and PCI is acceptable for those with low-to-intermediate anatomic complexity. However, there is uncertainty about the relative safety and efficacy of PCI in patients with more complex LMD and with comorbidities such as diabetes. No direct comparison trial has focused on revascularization in diabetic patients with LMD, and thus conclusions on the topic are subject to the limitations of subgroup analysis, as well as the heterogeneous exclusion criteria, and methodologies of individual trials. The available evidence suggests that among diabetics, CABG is superior in patients with LMD with SYNTAX (SYNergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with TAXus and dardiac surgery) score greater than 33, distal bifurcation disease, or multivessel disease. PCI may be appropriate in those with less-extensive disease or those with limited life expectancy or high surgical risk.

The Current State of Coronary Revascularization: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery

The question of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery remains among the most important questions in the treatment of coronary artery disease. The leading North American and European societies largely agree on the current guidelines for the revascularization of unprotected left-main disease (ULMD) and multivessel disease (MVD) which are largely supported by the outcomes of several large randomized trials including SYNTAX, PRECOMBAT, NOBLE, and EXCEL. While these trials are of the highest quality, currently available, they suffer several limitations, including the use of bare metal and/or first-generation drug-eluting stents in early trials and lack of updated surgical outcomes data. The objective of this review is to briefly discuss these key early trials, as well as explore contemporary studies, to provide insight on the current state of coronary revascularization. Evidence suggests that in ULMD and MVD, there are similar mortality rates for CABG and PCI but PCI is associated with fewer "early" strokes, whereas CABG is associated with fewer "late" strokes, myocardial infarctions, and lower need for repeat revascularization. Additionally, studies suggest that CABG remains superior to PCI in patients with intermediate/high SYNTAX scores and in MVD with concomitant proximal left anterior descending (pLAD) artery stenosis. Despite the preceding research and its basis for our current guidelines, there remains significant variation in care that has yet to be quantified. Emerging studies evaluating second-generation drug-eluting stents, specific lesion anatomy, and minimally invasive and hybrid approaches to CABG may lend itself to more individualized patient care.

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery surgery for left main disease according to lesion site: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Comparative data after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease according to lesion site (ostial/shaft vs distal) are scant. The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate outcomes after PCI or CABG for ULMCA disease according to lesion site.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and adjusted observational studies that compared PCI versus CABG in patients with ULMCA disease and reported outcomes according to lesion site were systematically identified. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeat revascularization) and all-cause death were the co-primary end points. Individual components of MACE were secondary end points. Sensitivity analysis including RCTs only were performed for each outcome.

RESULTS

Nine studies (3 RCTs, 6 adjusted observational), encompassing 6296 patients (2274 and 4022 treated for ostial/shaft or distal ULMCA, respectively) were included. At the 5-year follow-up, there were no significant differences between CABG and PCI for MACE, death, or any other secondary outcome for ostial/shaft ULMCA lesions (MACE: hazard ratio [HR], 1.0 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.79-1.27]; death: HR, 1.10 [95% CI, 0.84-1.46]). For distal ULMCA, PCI was associated with an increased risk of MACE (HR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.10-1.58), death (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.19-2.04), and revascularization (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.5-2.84). The benefit of CABG for MACE and revascularization was confirmed in the analysis limited to RCTs, whereas the benefit for mortality was not.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with distal ULMCA disease, CABG is associated with lower incidence of MACE and revascularization compared with PCI, whereas no differences in outcomes were observed for ostial/shaft ULMCA disease.

[Coronary revascularization: Interventional therapy or coronary bypass surgery]

Coronary artery disease remains the leading cause of death and is responsible for myocardial infarction, heart failure and angina. Therapy combines optimal control of cardiovascular risk factors with coronary revascularization performed by interventional therapy or bypass surgery. While interventional therapy is preferred for single or two vessel disease, interdisciplinary heart team decision should be reached for complex lesion, three vessel or left main disease. Both revascularization strategies perform similar for low level complexity three vessel or left main disease while coronary bypass surgery proved superior for more complex coronary artery disease. Heart team decision should be based on vascular anatomy and expected revascularization success under consideration of operative risk and patient preference.

Single or multiple arterial bypass graft surgery vs. percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare long-term all-cause mortality between patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) using multiple (MAG) or single arterial grafting (SAG).

METHODS AND RESULTS

The current study is a post hoc analysis of the SYNTAX Extended Survival Study, which compared PCI with CABG in patients with three-vessel (3VD) and/or left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) and evaluated survival with ≥10 years of follow-up. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at maximum follow-up (median 11.9 years) assessed in the as-treated population. Of the 1743 patients, 901 (51.7%) underwent PCI, 532 (30.5%) received SAG, and 310 (17.8%) had MAG. At maximum follow-up, all-cause death occurred in 305 (33.9%), 175 (32.9%), and 70 (22.6%) patients in the PCI, SAG, and MAG groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Multiple arterial grafting [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49-0.89], but not SAG (adjusted HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.67-1.03), was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality compared with PCI. In patients with 3VD, both MAG (adjusted HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.37-0.81) and SAG (adjusted HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50-0.91) were associated with significantly lower mortality than PCI, whereas in LMCAD patients, no significant differences between PCI and MAG (adjusted HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.56-1.46) or SAG (adjusted HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.81-1.53) were observed. In patients with revascularization of all three major myocardial territories, a positive correlation was observed between the number of myocardial territories receiving arterial grafts and survival (Ptrend = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that MAG might be the more desirable configuration for CABG to achieve lower long-term all-cause mortality than PCI in patients with 3VD and/or LMCAD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered on clinicaltrial.gov. SYNTAXES: NCT03417050 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03417050); SYNTAX: NCT00114972 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00114972).

Long-Term Outcomes After PCI or CABG for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease According to Lesion Location

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of lesion site (ostial or shaft vs. distal bifurcation) on long-term outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease.

BACKGROUND

Long-term comparative data after PCI and CABG for LMCA disease according to lesion site are limited.

METHODS

Patients from the MAIN-COMPARE (Revascularization for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: Comparison of Percutaneous Coronary Angioplasty Versus Surgical Revascularization) registry were analyzed, comparing adverse outcomes (all-cause mortality [a composite outcome of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or stroke] and target vessel revascularization) between PCI and CABG according to LMCA lesion location during a median follow-up period of 12.0 years.

RESULTS

In overall population, the adjusted risks for death and serious composite outcome were higher after PCI than after CABG for distal bifurcation disease, which was mainly separated beyond 5 years. These outcomes were not different for ostial or shaft disease. When comparing drug-eluting stents (DES) and CABG, the adjusted risks for death and serious composite outcome progressively diverged beyond 5 years after DES compared with CABG for distal bifurcation disease (death: hazard ratio: 1.78; 95% confidence interval: 1.22 to 2.59; composite outcome: hazard ratio: 1.94; 95% confidence interval: 1.35 to 2.79). This difference was driven mainly by PCI with a 2-stent technique for distal bifurcation. In contrast, the adjusted risks for these outcomes were similar between DES and CABG for ostial or shaft disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with distal LMCA bifurcation disease, CABG showed lower mortality and serious composite outcome rates compared with DES beyond 5 years. However, there were no between-group differences in these outcomes among patients with ostial or shaft LMCA disease.

Prognostically relevant periprocedural myocardial injury and infarction associated with percutaneous coronary interventions: a Consensus Document of the ESC Working Group on Cellular Biology of the Heart and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI)

A substantial number of chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) experience periprocedural myocardial injury or infarction. Accurate diagnosis of these PCI-related complications is required to guide further management given that their occurrence may be associated with increased risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Due to lack of scientific data, the cut-off thresholds of post-PCI cardiac troponin (cTn) elevation used for defining periprocedural myocardial injury and infarction, have been selected based on expert consensus opinions, and their prognostic relevance remains unclear. In this Consensus Document from the ESC Working Group on Cellular Biology of the Heart and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), we recommend, whenever possible, the measurement of baseline (pre-PCI) cTn and post-PCI cTn values in all CCS patients undergoing PCI. We confirm the prognostic relevance of the post-PCI cTn elevation >5× 99th percentile URL threshold used to define type 4a myocardial infarction (MI). In the absence of periprocedural angiographic flow-limiting complications or electrocardiogram (ECG) and imaging evidence of new myocardial ischaemia, we propose the same post-PCI cTn cut-off threshold (>5× 99th percentile URL) be used to define prognostically relevant ‘major’ periprocedural myocardial injury. As both type 4a MI and major periprocedural myocardial injury are strong independent predictors of all-cause mortality at 1 year post-PCI, they may be used as quality metrics and surrogate endpoints for clinical trials. Further research is needed to evaluate treatment strategies for reducing the risk of major periprocedural myocardial injury, type 4a MI, and MACE in CCS patients undergoing PCI.

Implications of Periprocedural Myocardial Biomarker Elevations and Commonly Used MI Definitions After Left Main PCI

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to: 1) assess the relationship of different thresholds of creatine kinase-myocardial band (CK-MB) and cardiac troponin with subsequent mortality; and 2) evaluate the prognostic significance of periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI) according to various definitions of myocardial infarction in patients with left main (LM) coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND

The magnitude of postprocedural biomarker elevation representing a clinically meaningful PMI after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is controversial.

METHODS

A total of 4,013 consecutive patients undergoing LM PCI at a single center from January 2004 to December 2016 were enrolled. CK-MB and cardiac troponin I (cTnI) were routinely collected at baseline and at frequent intervals between 8 and 48 hours after PCI. The primary and secondary outcomes were the covariate-adjusted 3-year rates of cardiovascular (CV) and all-cause mortality, respectively.

RESULTS

The 3-year rate of CV mortality progressively increased with higher peak CK-MB values. CV mortality was first independently predicted by postprocedural CK-MB 3 to 5 times the upper reference limit (URL) (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 2.93; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-8.40), whereas all-cause death was independently predicted only by CK-MB ≥ 10 × URL (aHR: 3.25; 95% CI: 1.37-7.70). In contrast, no level of peak postprocedural cTnI was associated with CV or all-cause death. PMI by the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI), Academic Research Consortium-2 (ARC-2), and fourth universal definition of myocardial infarction (UDMI) occurred in 1.3%, 3.1%, and 5.1% of patients, respectively. The SCAI definition was significantly associated with 3-year CV mortality (aHR: 4.93; 95% CI: 1.92-12.69) and all-cause mortality (aHR: 3.11; 95% CI: 1.33-7.27), whereas the ARC-2 and fourth UDMI definitions were not.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large cohort of consecutive patients undergoing LM PCI, intermediate (≥3 × URL) and high (≥10 × URL) levels of peak postprocedural CK-MB independently predicted 3-year CV and all-cause mortality, respectively, whereas even large elevations of post-PCI cTnI did not. The SCAI definition (but not the ARC-2 or fourth UDMI) of PMI was independently associated with mortality after LM PCI.

Effect of Heart Failure on Long-Term Clinical Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Severe Coronary Artery Disease

Background Heart failure might be an important determinant in choosing coronary revascularization modalities. There was no previous study evaluating the effect of heart failure on long-term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) relative to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods and Results Among 14 867 consecutive patients undergoing first coronary revascularization with PCI or isolated CABG between January 2011 and December 2013 in the CREDO-Kyoto PCI/CABG registry Cohort-3, we identified the current study population of 3380 patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease, and compared clinical outcomes between PCI and CABG stratified by the subgroup based on the status of heart failure. There were 827 patients with heart failure (PCI: N=511, and CABG: N=316), and 2553 patients without heart failure (PCI: N=1619, and CABG: N=934). In patients with heart failure, the PCI group compared with the CABG group more often had advanced age, severe frailty, acute and severe heart failure, and elevated inflammatory markers. During a median 5.9 years of follow-up, there was a significant interaction between heart failure and the mortality risk of PCI relative to CABG (interaction P=0.009), with excess mortality risk of PCI relative to CABG in patients with heart failure (HR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.28-2.42; P<0.001) and no excess mortality risk in patients without heart failure (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.80-1.34; P=0.77). Conclusions There was a significant interaction between heart failure and the mortality risk of PCI relative to CABG with excess risk in patients with heart failure and neutral risk in patients without heart failure.

Cardiac Surgery 2020 Reviewed

In 2020, nearly 30,000 published references appeared in the PubMed for the search term "cardiac surgery." While SARS-CoV-2 affected the number of surgical procedures, it did not affect outcomes reporting. Using the PRISMA approach, we selected relevant publications and prepared a results-oriented summary. We reviewed primarily the fields of coronary and conventional valve surgery and their overlap with interventional alternatives. The coronary field started with a discussion on trial data value and their interpretation. Registry comparisons of coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention confirmed outcomes for severe coronary artery disease and advanced comorbidities with CABG. Multiple arterial grafting was best. In aortic valve surgery, meta-analyses of randomized trials report that transcatheter aortic valve implantation may provide a short-term advantage but long-term survival may be better with classic aortic valve replacement (AVR). Minimally invasive AVR and decellularized homografts emerged as hopeful techniques. In mitral and tricuspid valve surgery, excellent perioperative and long-term outcomes were presented for structural mitral regurgitation. For both, coronary and valve surgery, outcomes are strongly dependent on surgeon expertise. Kidney disease increases perioperative risk, but does not limit the surgical treatment effect. Finally, a cursory look is thrown on aortic, transplant, and assist-device surgery with a glimpse into the current stand of xenotransplantation. As in recent years, this article summarizes publications perceived as important by us. It does not expect to be complete and cannot be free of individual interpretation. We aimed to provide up-to-date information for decision-making and patient information.

Prognostic Effect of the SYNTAX Score on 10-Year Outcomes After Left Main Coronary Artery Revascularization in a Randomized Population: Insights From the Extended PRECOMBAT Trial

Background

The long‐term prognostic effect of the SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score (SS) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) for left main coronary artery disease is controversial.

Methods and Results

In the PRECOMBAT (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery Versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) trial, 600 patients with left main coronary artery disease were randomized to undergo PCI with drug‐eluting stents (n=300) or CABG (n=300). We compared 10‐year outcomes after PCI and CABG according to SS categories and evaluated the predictive value of SS in each revascularization arm. The primary outcome was a major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia‐driven target‐vessel revascularization) at 10 years. Among 566 patients with valid SS measurement at baseline, 240 (42.4%) had low SS, 200 (35.3%) had intermediate SS, and 126 (22.3%) had high SS. The 10‐year rates of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events were not significantly different between PCI and CABG in low (21.6% versus 22.2%, P=0.97), intermediate (31.8% versus 22.2%; P=0.13), and high SS (46.2% versus 35.7%; P=0.31) (P‐for‐interaction=0.46). There were no significant interactions between SS categories and revascularization modalities for death (P=0.92); composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (P=0.87); and target‐vessel revascularization (P=0.06). Higher SS categories were associated with higher risks for major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events in the PCI arm but not in the CABG arm.

Conclusions

Ten‐year clinical outcomes between PCI and CABG were not significantly different according to the SS. The SS was predictive of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events after PCI but not after CABG.

Registration

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03871127.

Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: JACC Historical Breakthroughs in Perspective

Over the last 4 decades, percutaneous coronary intervention has evolved dramatically and is now an acceptable treatment option for patients with advanced coronary artery disease. However, trialists have struggled to establish the respective roles for percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery, especially in patients with multivessel disease and unprotected left-main stem coronary artery disease. Several pivotal trials and meta-analyses comparing these 2 revascularization strategies have enabled the relative merits of each technique to be established with regard to the type of ischemic syndrome, the coronary anatomy, and the patient's overall comorbidity. Precision medicine with individualized prognosis is emerging as an important method of selecting treatment. However, the never-ending advancement of technology, in conjunction with the emergence of novel pharmacological agents, will in the future continue to force us to reconsider the evolving question: "Which treatment strategy is better and for which patient?"

Myocardial Revascularization Surgery: JACC Historical Breakthroughs in Perspective

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was introduced in the 1960s as the first procedure for direct coronary artery revascularization and rapidly became one of the most common surgical procedures worldwide, with an overall total of more than 20 million operations performed. CABG continues to be the most common cardiac surgical procedure performed and has been one of the most carefully studied therapies. Best CABG techniques, optimal bypass conduits, and appropriate patient selection have been rigorously tested in landmark clinical trials, some of which have resolved controversy and most of which have stoked further debate and trials. The evolution of CABG cannot be properly portrayed without presenting it in the context of the parallel development of percutaneous coronary intervention. In this Historical Perspective, we a provide a broad overview of the history of coronary revascularization with a focus on the foundations, evolution, best evidence, and future directions of CABG.

Understanding the Merits and Drawbacks of Noninferiority Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine

A noninferiority trial is designed to show that the new treatment is not unacceptably worse than the standard treatment by more than a predefined noninferiority margin. These trials are typically performed when standard placebo-controlled trials are considered to be unethical or impractical and the new treatment offers advantages over the existing standard treatment in terms of safety, convenience, or cost. Given that noninferiority trials are being performed with increasing frequency in cardiovascular applications, it is important to understand their complex trial design and analysis. This narrative review aims to provide readers with a detailed perspective on the goals, characteristics, design, and analysis of noninferiority trials. Trials designed to show noninferiority require an appropriate reference population, a proven standard treatment and dose, an appropriate margin of noninferiority that is statistically justifiable (based on historical placebo-controlled trials evaluating standard treatment effect) and clinically reasonable (choosing the fraction of the effect of the standard drug that should be "preserved" by the new drug), a high level of adherence to treatment, and adequate statistical power to reliably conclude that a treatment is truly noninferior and therefore effective. The merits and pitfalls of noninferiority trials, with representative contemporary cardiovascular clinical trials in interventional cardiology, cardiac surgery, and atrial fibrillation management as exemplars, are described. The key issues that challenge the design, conduct, analysis, interpretation, and implementation of these trials are discussed, and a variety of ways to identify and mitigate key errors are recommended to allow for optimal evaluation of noninferiority trials conducted in cardiovascular medicine.

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

BACKGROUND

The optimal revascularization strategy for the elderly with complex coronary artery disease remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

The 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).

METHODS

In 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.

RESULTS

Among 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.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly 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).

The Anaortic Technique with Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery Grafting - Filling the Gap in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has consolidated its role as the most effective procedure for treating patients with advanced atherosclerotic coronary artery disease, reducing the long-term risk of myocardial infarction and death compared to other therapies and relieving angina. Despite the recognized benefits afforded by surgical myocardial revascularization, a subset of higher-risk patients bears a more elevated risk of perioperative stroke. Stroke remains the drawback of conventional CABG and has been strongly linked to aortic manipulation (cannulation, cross-clamping, and side-biting clamping for the performance of proximal aortic anastomoses) and the use of cardiopulmonary bypass. Adoption of off-pump CABG (OPCAB) is demonstrated to lower the risk of perioperative stroke, as well as reducing the risk of short-term mortality, renal failure, atrial fibrillation, bleeding, and length of intensive care unit stay. However, increased risk persists owing to the need for the tangential ascending aorta clamping to construct the proximal anastomosis. The concept of anaortic (aorta no-touch) OPCAB (anOPCAB) stems from eliminating ascending aorta manipulation, virtually abolishing the risk of embolism caused by aortic wall debris into the brain circulation. The adoption of anOPCAB has been shown to further decrease the risk of postoperative stroke, especially in higher-risk patients, entailing a step forward and a refinement of outcomes provided by the primeval OPCAB technique. Therefore, anOPCAB has been the recommended technique in patients with cerebrovascular disease and/or calcification or atheromatous plaque in the ascending aorta and should be preferred in patients with high-risk factors for neurological damage and stroke.

Matched Analysis of Surgical versus Percutaneous Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Disease

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is being performed more frequently for left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD). This study evaluated a real-world propensity-matched analysis of surgical versus percutaneous revascularization for LMCAD.

METHODS

Adults (≥18 years) at a single academic institution undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or PCI for left main stenosis ≥50% between 2010-2018 were examined. Greedy propensity-matching techniques were used to generate well-matched cohorts, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare survival. Multivariable Cox models were created for 5-year mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE).

RESULTS

1091 with LMCAD were identified (898 CABG, 193 PCI). Patients undergoing PCI were significantly older (77 vs 68 years, p<0.001), more likely to have heart failure (26.94% vs 13.14%, p<0.001), and were less likely to have 3-vessel disease (42.49% vs 65.59%, p<0.001). Propensity-matching yielded 215 CABG and 134 PCI well-matched patients. In the matched analysis, 1-year (77.61% vs 88.37%) and 5-year (48.77% vs 75.62%) survival were lower with PCI. Rates of MACCE at 5-years were also higher with PCI (64.93% vs 32.56%, p<0.001). Rates of both myocardial infarction (19.40% vs 7.44%, p=0.001) and repeat revascularization (26.12% vs 7.91%, p<0.001) were higher with PCI. Following risk adjustment, CABG remained associated with reduced risk of mortality (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.29-0.54; p<0.001) and MACCE (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.28-0.48; p<0.001) at 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world, propensity-matched analysis demonstrates substantial advantages in survival and MACCE with CABG for LMCAD, supporting surgical revascularization in this clinical setting in appropriate operative candidates.