Randomized Trial of Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

Long-Term (≥10 Years) Safety of Percutaneous Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Stenosis With Drug-Eluting Stents

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of unprotected left main disease (ULM) with drug-eluting stents (DES) is hampered by lack of information on long-term (≥10 years) safety data. All patients treated with PCI on ULM in 9 international centers with at least 10 years follow-up were enrolled. Baseline and procedural features were recorded. Repeat PCI (re-PCI) on ULM at 10 years was the primary end point. Secondary end points included major adverse cardiac events and its components (cardiac and noncardiac death, myocardial infarction, re-PCI not on ULM, and stent thrombosis). Sensitivity analysis was performed according to the presence of isolated ULM disease: 284 patients were enrolled. A total of 70 patients (21%) performed a re-PCI on ULM, 39 in the first year, and 31 between 1 and 10 years (only 5 overall performed for acute coronary syndrome). Patients with re-PCI on ULM did not show differences in baseline and procedural features, or experience higher rates of cardiovascular death (12% vs 11%, p 0.65), myocardial infarction (11% vs 6%, p 0.56), or of re-PCI on non-ULM disease (31% vs 27%, p 0.76) compared with those without re-PCI on ULM. At Kaplan-Meier analysis, patients with PCI in other coronary vessels were at higher risk of major adverse cardiac events, driven by target vessel revascularization (20.4% vs 32.9%, p 0.009), as confirmed at multivariate analysis (stenosis other than LM; hazard ratio 2, 1.4 to 2.7, all CI 95%). In conclusion, despite of using first-generation stents, PCI on ULM is safe, with low rates of recurrent events due to index revascularization. Progression of atherosclerotic lesions on other coronary vessels represents the only independent predictive factor for prognosis.

Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Drug-Eluting Stents Implantation for Previous Myocardial Infarction

Patients with previous myocardial infarction (MI) have a high risk of recurrence. Little is known about the effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with a previous MI and left main or multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). We compared long-term outcomes of these 2 strategies in 672 patients with previous MI and left main or multivessel CAD, who underwent CABG (n = 349) or PCI with DES (n = 323). A pooled database from the BEST, PRECOMBAT, and SYNTAX trials was analyzed, and the primary outcome was a composite of death from any causes, MI, or stroke. Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. The median follow-up duration was 59.8 months. The rate of the primary outcome was significantly lower with CABG than PCI (hazard ratio [HR] 0.59, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.82; p = 0.002). This difference was driven by a marked reduction in the rate of MI (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.55, p <0.001). The benefit of CABG over PCI was consistent across all major subgroups. The individual risks of death from any causes or stroke were comparable between the 2 groups. Conversely, the rate of repeat revascularization was significantly lower with CABG than PCI (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.51, p <0.001). In conclusion, in the patients with previous MI and left main or multivessel CAD, compared to PCI with DES, CABG significantly reduces the risk of death from any causes, MI, or stroke.

Editor-in-Chief's Top Picks From 2015: Part One

Each week, I record audio summaries for every article in JACC, as well as an issue summary. While this process has been time-consuming, I have become very familiar with every paper that we publish. Thus, I have personally selected the papers (both original investigations and review articles) from 13 distinct specialties for your review. In addition to my personal choices, I have included manuscripts that have been the most accessed or downloaded on our websites, as well as those selected by the JACC Editorial Board members. There are approximately 130 articles selected across this 2-part series, which represent less than 3% of the papers submitted to the Journal in 2015. In order to present the full breadth of this important research in a consumable fashion, we will present these manuscripts over the course of 2 issues in JACC. Part One includes the sections: Congenital Heart Disease, Coronary Disease & Interventions, CVD Prevention & Health Promotion, Cardiac Failure, Cardiomyopathies, Genetics, Omics, & Tissue Regeneration, and Hypertension (1-60). Part Two includes the sections: Imaging, Metabolic Disorders & Lipids, Rhythm Disorders, Statistics, Valvular Heart Disease, and Vascular Medicine.

Percutaneous coronary intervention for coronary bifurcation disease: 11th consensus document from the European Bifurcation Club

Coronary bifurcations are involved in 15-20% of all percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) and remain one of the most challenging lesions in interventional cardiology in terms of procedural success rate as well as long-term cardiac events. The optimal management of bifurcation lesions is, despite a fast growing body of scientific literature, the subject of considerable debate. The European Bifurcation Club (EBC) was initiated in 2004 to support a continuous overview of the field, and aims to facilitate a scientific discussion and an exchange of ideas on the management of bifurcation disease. The EBC hosts an annual, compact meeting, dedicated to bifurcations, which brings together physicians, engineers, biologists, physicists, epidemiologists and statisticians for detailed discussions. Every meeting is finalised with a consensus statement which reflects the unique opportunity of combining the opinions of interventional cardiologists with the opinions of a large variety of other scientists on bifurcation management. The present 11th EBC consensus document represents the summary of the up-to-date EBC consensus and recommendations. It points to the fact that there is a multitude of strategies and approaches to bifurcation stenting within the provisional strategy and in the different two-stent strategies. The main EBC recommendation for PCI of bifurcation lesions remains to use main vessel (MV) stenting with a proximal optimisation technique (POT) and provisional side branch (SB) stenting as a preferred approach. The consensus document covers a moving target. Much more scientific work is needed in non-left main (LM) and LM bifurcation lesions for continuous improvement of the outcome of our patients.

Coronary Atherosclerosis: Pathophysiologic Basis for Diagnosis and Management

Coronary atherosclerosis is a long lasting and continuously evolving disease with multiple clinical manifestations ranging from asymptomatic to stable angina, acute coronary syndrome (ACS), heart failure (HF) and sudden cardiac death (SCD). Genetic and environmental factors contribute to the development and progression of coronary atherosclerosis. In this review, current knowledge related to the diagnosis and management of coronary atherosclerosis based on pathophysiologic mechanisms will be discussed. In addition to providing state-of-the-art concepts related to coronary atherosclerosis, special consideration will be given on how to apply data from epidemiologic studies and randomized clinical trials to the individual patient. The greatest challenge for the clinician in the twenty-first century is not in absorbing the fast accumulating new knowledge, but rather in applying this knowledge to the individual patient.

Reviewing hybrid coronary revascularization: challenges, controversies and opportunities

Two main approaches to myocardial revascularization currently exist, coronary artery bypass and percutaneous coronary intervention. In patients with advanced coronary artery disease, coronary artery bypass surgery is associated with improved long term outcomes while percutaneous coronary intervention is associated with lower periprocedural complications. A new approach has emerged in the last decade that attempts to reap the benefits of bypass surgery and stenting while minimizing the shortcomings of each approach. This new approach, hybrid coronary revascularization, has shown encouraging early results. Minimally invasive techniques for bypass surgery have played a large part of bringing this approach into contemporary practice.

Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Significant unprotected left main stem (ULMS) disease is in approximately 5% to 7% of patients undergoing coronary angiography. Historically, coronary artery bypass grafting has been the gold standard treatment of these patients. With recent advances in stent technology, adjunctive pharmacotherapy, and operator experience, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is increasingly regarded as a viable alternative treatment option, especially in patients with favorable coronary anatomy (low and intermediate SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery) scores). This article aims to discuss the evidence supporting PCI for ULMS disease, current guidelines, and technical aspects.

Revascularization in stable coronary artery disease: a combined perspective from an interventional cardiologist and a cardiac surgeon

It is now half a century since the start of coronary bypass graft surgery (CABG) with the first percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) following just over a decade later. The relative merits of PCI vs. CABG for stable coronary artery disease (stable-CAD) have continued to be debated ever since and have been the focus of around 20 randomized trials and numerous registry studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. The aim of this review is to identify areas of agreement, disagreement, and uncertainties in the role of PCI and CABG in patients with stable-CAD.

Unprotected Left Main Disease: Indications and Optimal Strategies for Percutaneous Intervention

OPINION STATEMENT

Although the incidence of left main (LM) coronary artery disease is relatively low in patients undergoing routine angiography, it is a common presentation in patients with acute coronary syndromes. With the current interventional tools and techniques, percutaneous intervention for LM disease has become a viable alternative to the traditional coronary artery bypass grafting. Factors that contribute to the success and appropriateness of percutaneous intervention for LM disease include coronary anatomy and patient-specific factors such as left ventricular function. Multiple considerations should be taken into account prior to intervention, including hemodynamic support if necessary, intravascular imaging to guide therapy, and stent technique. This review provides an overview of the current body of literature to support the use of percutaneous intervention in LM disease and serves as guideline for the interventionalist approaching LM revascularization.

Has the difference in mortality between percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting in people with heart disease and diabetes changed over the years? A systematic review and meta-regression

OBJECTIVES

To examine the difference in outcome between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), to see if it has changed over the years in diabetics deemed eligible for both treatments; and to contrast the long-term mortality findings with those in non-diabetics.

DESIGN

Meta-analyses using data from randomised controlled trials found by searches on MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, from their inception until March 2015.

SETTING

Studies had to be randomised controlled trials comparing PCI with CABG.

PARTICIPANTS

Those taking part in the studies had to have multivessel cardiac or left main artery cardiac disease and be deemed eligible for both treatments.

INTERVENTIONS

PCI or CABG.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

The primary outcome was all cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were a composite of mortality, stroke and myocardial infarction; cardiovascular death; and MACCE (Major Adverse Cardiac or Cerebrovascular Event). The longest follow-up was used in the analysis.

RESULTS

Among 14 studies (4868 diabetics) reported over three decades, meta-regression shows no relationship between the year of publication and the difference in long term all cause mortality between PCI and CABG. CABG has maintained an approximately 30% mortality advantage compared to PCI. The other outcomes used showed the same lack of change over the years. These findings held true among insulin-requiring and non-insulin-requiring diabetics. However, among non-diabetics included in the 14 studies, there was no difference in mortality outcome between PCI and CABG.

CONCLUSIONS

The difference in outcome between PCI and CABG in diabetics has not narrowed from the beginning-with balloon angioplasty to current PCI-with the second generation of drug eluting stents. In contrast to the non-diabetics, there is a persistent 30% benefit in all cause mortality favouring CABG in diabetics, and this should be a major factor in treatment recommendation.

Update on percutaneous intervention for left main coronary artery stenosis

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using drug-eluting stents (DES) is currently considered as a viable alternative to coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) for selected patients with left main coronary artery disease. The updated results of the landmark randomized trials comparing CABG versus PCI demonstrated comparable 5-year outcomes and are in line with the current guidelines that designate PCI as a reasonable treatment in this disease subset. Given that the completed randomized trials did not include contemporary DESs, the upcoming results of the ongoing trials evaluating the performance of new-generation DES compared with CABG (such as the EXCEL trial), may further help to clarify the current role and future recommendations of PCI for left main coronary artery disease. Apart from the recent stent technology, further improvements in outcomes after PCI may be possible when it is used with an integrated approach that combines functional concepts for decision-making, adjunctive imaging support and optimal pharmacotherapies.

Interventional Management of Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Patient Selection and Technique Optimization

For many years, coronary artery bypass graft surgery has been the gold standard for revascularization of patients with left main disease; however, increasing evidence suggests that percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents may be an acceptable alternative or even preferred in select cases. This review will present clinical evidence examining the outcomes of drug-eluting stents compared to coronary artery bypass graft surgery for unprotected left main coronary artery disease and discuss the anatomic factors, patient variables, and clinical strategies that may dictate choice of revascularization modality for patients with left main disease. If percutaneous coronary intervention is selected to treat unprotected left main disease, meticulous technique is essential to optimize outcomes, including use of procedural physiology and imaging guidance, optimal stent and adjunct pharmacology use, and expert management of the distal bifurcation. Finally, issues of equipoise and uncertainty are identified, representing areas for future investigation.