Prevalence of unfavorable angiographic characteristics for percutaneous intervention in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease

Real-World Experience and Outcomes With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Protected Versus Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Insights from the Veteran Affairs Clinical Assessment Reporting and Tracking Program

The practice patterns and outcomes of protected left main (PLM) and unprotected left main (ULM) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are not well defined in contemporary US clinical practice. Data were collected from all Veteran Affairs catheterization laboratories participating in the Clinical Assessment Reporting and Tracking Program between 2009 and 2019. The analysis included 4,351 patients who underwent left main PCI, of whom 1,306 pairs of PLM and ULM PCI were included in a propensity-matched cohort. Selected temporal trends were also assessed. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) outcomes at 1 year, which was defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, rehospitalization for myocardial infarction (MI), rehospitalization for stroke, or urgent revascularization. Patients who underwent ULM PCI compared with patients who underwent PLM PCI were older (age 71.5 vs 69.2 years, p <0.001), more clinically complex, and more likely to present with acute coronary syndrome. In the propensity-matched cohort, radial access was used more often for ULM PCI (21% [273] vs 14% [185], p <0.001) and ULM PCI was more likely to involve the left main bifurcation (22% vs 14%, p = 0.003) and require mechanical circulatory support (10% [134] vs 1% [17], p <0.001). The 1-year MACEs occurred more frequently with ULM PCI than PLM PCI (22% [289] vs 16% [215], p ≤0.001) and all-cause mortality was also higher (16% [213] vs 10% [125], p ≤0.001). In the matched cohort, there was a low incidence of rehospitalization for MI (4% [48] ULM vs 4% [48] PLM, p = 1.000) or revascularization (7% [94] ULM vs 6% [84] PLM, p = 0.485). In this real-world experience, patients who underwent PLM PCI had better 1-year outcomes than those who underwent ULM PCI; however, in both groups, there was a high rate of mortality and MACEs at 1 year despite a relatively low rate of MI or revascularization.

Do two operators improve outcomes in left main percutaneous coronary intervention? Insights from the ORPKI Registry

BACKGROUND

Significant left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease is prevalent in 7% of patients undergoing angiography. Limited data exists on the impact of double scrubbing in LMCA PCI. We sought to assess periprocedural outcomes in two-operator LMCA percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

Using data from the Polish National Registry of PCI (ORPKI), we collected data on 28,745 patients undergoing LMCA PCI from 154 centers. Patients were divided into two groups based on the number of operators performing PCI (one vs. two operators).

RESULTS

LMCA PCI was performed by a single operator in 86% of the cases and by two operators in 14% of cases. Patients treated by two operators had a greater comorbidity burden including diabetes mellitus, arterial hypertension, previous myocardial infarction, and previous revascularization. In addition, these were more likely to be treated in high-volume centers, by operators with higher volume of LMCA PCIs. The risk of periprocedural death (2.37% vs. 2.44%; P=0.78), as well as cardiac arrest, coronary artery perforation, no-reflow, and puncture site bleeding was comparable between the two groups. On multivariable analysis, we found that a two-operator strategy was an independent predictor of periprocedural death, with this effect being much more profound in an elective setting (OR=5.13 [1.37-19.26]; P=0.015), compared to an urgent (ACS) setting (OR=1.32 [1.00-1.73]; P=0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that a two-operator approach is not necessarily routinely recommended for LMCA interventions, although it can be considered for more complex cases.

Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Protected versus Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Insights from the VA CART Program

Background

Practice patterns and outcomes of protected left main (PLM) and unprotected left main (ULM) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), as well as the differences between these types of PCI, are not well defined in real-world clinical practice.

Methods

Data collected from all Veteran Affairs (VA) catheterization laboratories participating in the Clinical Assessment Reporting and Tracking Program between 2009 and 2019. The analysis included 4,351 patients undergoing left main PCI, of which 1,306 pairs of PLM and ULM PCI were included in a propensity matched cohort. Patients and procedural characteristics were compared between PLM and ULM PCI. Temporal trends were also assessed. Peri-procedural and one-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were compared using cumulative incidence plots. The primary outcome was MACE outcomes at 1-year, which was defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, rehospitalization for myocardial infarction (MI), rehospitalization for stroke or urgent revascularization.

Results

ULM PCI patients in comparison to PLM PCI were older (71.5 vs 69.2; P < 0.001), more clinically complex and more likely to present with ACS. In the propensity matched cohort, radial access was used more often for ULM PCI (21% [273] vs. 14% [185], P < 0.001), and ULM PCI was more likely to involve the LM bifurcation (22% vs 14%; P = 0.003) and require mechanical circulatory support (10% [134] vs 1% [17]; P <0.001). One-year MACE occurred more frequently with ULM PCI compared to PLM PCI (22% [289] vs. 16% [215]; P = < 0.001) and all-cause mortality was also higher (16% [213] vs. 10% [125]; P = < 0.001). In the matched cohort there was a low incidence of rehospitalization for MI (4% [48] ULM vs. 4% [48] PLM; P = 1.000) or revascularization (7% [94] ULM vs. 6% [84] PLM; P = 0.485).

Conclusions

Veterans undergoing PLM PCI had better one-year outcomes than those undergoing ULM PCI, but in both groups there was a high rate of mortality and MACE at one-year despite a relatively low rate of MI or revascularization.

Determination of Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis Through Noninvasive Testing to Guide Revascularization in Ischemic Heart Disease

Anatomically severe left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis (>50%) remains one of the few groups to benefit from early revascularization in stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). Identification of these patients through widely available noninvasive testing would decrease the need for additional upfront anatomic testing, lowering the overall cost of healthcare. Patients with SIHD who underwent either percutaneous or surgical revascularization over a 7-year period at our institution were retrospectively analyzed and categorized as having LMCA stenosis versus non-LM stenosis. All preceding noninvasive testing, including resting electrocardiogram, echocardiogram, and functional testing was evaluated and compared between groups using chi-square and t test. In total, 806 patients were evaluated. Of those, 121 were identified as having significant LMCA stenosis with 685 patients in the non-LM cohort. Between LMCA versus non-LM cohorts, there were similar rates of electrocardiogram abnormalities (68.9% vs 70.8%, p >0.05), abnormal echocardiograms (72.7% vs 69.7%, p >0.05), abnormal functional testing (83.3% vs 77.4%, p >0.05), and high-risk imaging findings (5.6% vs 4.8%, p >0.05). More importantly, of those with a complete workup, there were similar rates of normal results between the LMCA (3 of 18, 16.7%) and non-LM stenosis (9 of 189, 4.8%) groups. A comprehensive noninvasive profile of patients with IHD failed to identify or exclude patients with anatomically severe LMCA stenosis, necessitating anatomic assessment.

Preoperative Evaluation in the 21st Century

This review aims to provide a conceptual framework for preoperative evaluation and to highlight the clinical evidence available to support perioperative decision-making.

Deep learning for myocardial ischemia auxiliary diagnosis using CZT SPECT myocardial perfusion imaging

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization reported that cardiovascular disease is the most common cause of death worldwide. On average, one person dies of heart disease every 26 min worldwide. Deep learning approaches are characterized by the appropriate combination of abnormal features based on numerous annotated images. The constructed convolutional neural network (CNN) model can identify normal states of reversible and irreversible myocardial defects and alert physicians for further diagnosis.

METHODS

Cadmium zinc telluride single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion resting-state images were collected at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical Center, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, and were analyzed with a deep learning convolutional neural network to classify myocardial perfusion images for coronary heart diseases.

RESULTS

In these grey-scale images, the heart blood flow distribution was the most crucial feature. The deep learning technique of You Only Look Once was used to determine the myocardial defect area and crop the images. After surrounding noise had been eliminated, a three-dimensional CNN model was used to identify patients with coronary heart diseases. The prediction area under the curve, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity was 90.97, 87.08, 86.49, and 87.41%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our prototype system can considerably reduce the time required for image interpretation and improve the quality of medical care. It can assist clinical experts by offering accurate coronary heart disease diagnosis in practice.

The Clinical Outcomes of Ventricular Septal Rupture Secondary to Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Retrospective, Observational Trial

Background

Ventricular septal rupture (VSR) is a severe mechanical complication secondary to acute myocardial infarction (AMI) with a dreadful prognosis. The goal of our study was to evaluate the mortality and to identify the predictors of mortality for this population.

Methods

From June 2012 to July 2021, patients with VSR secondary to AMI were initially screened for eligibility in this study. The potential risk predictors were determined using appropriate logistic regression models.

Results

In this retrospective study, a total of 50 cases were included, and 14 patients survived and got discharged successfully. Univariable analyses indicated that the heart rate (HR), white blood cell (WBC) count, neutrophils count, serum glucose, serum creatinine, serum lactic acid, and the closure of rupture were significantly associated with mortality among these special populations.

Conclusion

This study found that such high mortality in patients with VSR after AMI was significantly correlated with these risk factors representing sympathetic excitation and large infarct size. Coronary revascularization combined with the closure of rupture might be helpful in improving their prognosis.

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.

Simplifying the ISCHEMIA trial algorithm for clinical practice: Identifying left main coronary artery disease using coronary artery calcium scans

BACKGROUND

Several recent trials have evaluated invasive versus medical therapy for stable ischemic heart disease. Importantly, patients with significant left main coronary stenosis (LMCS) were excluded from these trials. In the ISCHEMIA trial, these patients were identified by a coronary CT angiogram (CCTA), which adds time, expense, and contrast exposure. We tested whether a coronary artery calcium scan (CACS), a simpler, less expensive test, could replace CCTA to exclude significant LMCS.

METHODS

We hypothesized that patients with ≥50% LMCS would have a LM CACS score > 0. As a corollary, we postulated that a LM CACS = 0 would exclude patients with LMCS. To test this, we searched Intermountain Healthcare's electronic medical records database for all adult patients who had undergone non-contrast cardiac CT for quantitative CACS scoring prior to invasive coronary angiography (ICA). Patients aged <50 and those with a heart transplant were excluded. Cases with incomplete (qualitative) angiographic reports for LMCS and those with incomplete or discrepant LM CACS results were reviewed and reassessed blinded to CACS or ICA findings, respectively.

RESULTS

Among 669 candidate patients with CACS followed by ICA, 36 qualifying patients were identified who had a quantitative CACS score and LMCS ≥ 50%. Their age averaged 71.8 years, and 81% were men. Angiographic LMCS averaged 72% (range 50%-99%). Median time between CACS and ICA was 6 days. Total CACS score averaged 2,383 Agatston Units (AU), range 571-6,636. LM CACS score averaged 197 AU, range 31-610. Importantly, no LMCS patient had a LM CACS score of 0 vs 57% (362/633) of non-LMCS controls (P < .00001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support the hypothesis that an easily administered, inexpensive, low radiation CACS can identify a large subset of patients with a very low risk of LMCS who would not have the need for routine CCTA. Using CACS to exclude LMCS may efficiently allow for safe implementation of an initial medical therapy strategy of patients with stable ischemic heart disease in clinical practice. These promising results deserve validation in larger data sets.

Feasibility and Outcomes of Left Main to Branch Vessel PCI with Novel Tapered Coronary Stent in a Tertiary Care Centre: A Real World Experience

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and efficacy of Novel tapered (BioMime™ Morph) sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) for left main PCI in a real-world scenario.

BACKGROUND

Currently no data is available on clinical usefulness of tapered ultrathin stents in left main PCI.

METHODS

This was a prospective, non-randomised, single centre study carried out between February 2018 and May 2020 at a tertiary cardiac care centre in southern India. The study included patients treated with BioMime Morph tapered stent for distal de novo LMB lesion or ostial LAD/LCX lesions with significant size disparity between reference segments based on the eligibility criteria. Primary endpoint of the study was the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) composed of cardiac death, myocardial infraction, and clinically driven target-lesion revascularisation at follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 41 patients (average age of 54.83±9.81 years) were included in the study. Average SS-2 score was 23.17±5.42. Majority of the lesions (n=31; 75.61%) were of medina class (0.1.0). Provisional single stent strategy was adopted for treatment of LMB lesions. TIMI flow-3 was achieved in 40 patients (97.56%). Median clinical follow-up was 20 months (range 6-34 months) There was no periprocedural complication or MACE during follow-up.

Differential Factors for Predicting Outcomes in Left Main versus Non-Left Main Coronary Bifurcation Stenting

Background: No large-scale study has compared the clinical and angiographic predictors of cardiovascular events in patients with left main bifurcation (LMB) and non-LMB stenting after second-generation DES implantation. Herein, we investigated differential clinical and angiographic factors for predicting outcomes in LMB versus non-LMB stenting. Methods: A total of 2648 patients with bifurcation lesions treated with second-generation DESs from the retrospective patient cohort were divided into an LMB group (n = 935) and a non-LMB group (n = 1713). The primary outcome was the 7-year incidence of target lesion failure (TLF), defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. Results: The incidence of TLF was 9.8%. Those in the LMB group were associated with a higher risk of TLF (14.2% versus 7.5%, p < 0.001) than those in the non-LMB group. Regarding the LMB group, independent predictors of TLF were chronic kidney disease (CKD), reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and two-stenting. Regarding the non-LMB group, CKD, reduced LVEF, old age, diabetes, and small diameter of the main vessel stent were independent predictors of TLF. Conclusions: The two-stent strategy could potentially increase TLF for the LMB lesions, and achieving the maximal diameter of the main vessel stent could result in better clinical outcomes for non-LMB lesions.

Impact of lesion preparation strategies on outcomes of left main PCI: The EXCEL trial

OBJECTIVES

We examined outcomes according to lesion preparation strategy (LPS) in patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the EXCEL trial.

BACKGROUND

The optimal LPS for LMCA PCI is unclear.

METHODS

We categorized LPS hierarchically (high to low) as: (a) rotational atherectomy (RA); (b) cutting or scoring balloon (CSB); (c) balloon angioplasty (BAL); and d) direct stenting (DIR). The primary endpoint was 3-year MACE; all-cause death, stroke, or myocardial infarction.

RESULTS

Among 938 patients undergoing LMCA PCI, RA was performed in 6.0%, CSB 9.5%, BAL 71.3%, and DIR 13.2%. In patients treated with DIR, BAL, CSB, and RA, respectively, there was a progressive increase in SYNTAX score, LMCA complex bifurcation, trifurcation or calcification, number of stents, and total stent length. Any procedural complication occurred in 10.4% of cases overall, with the lowest rate in the DIR (7.4%) and highest in the RA group (16.1%) (p_trend  = .22). There were no significant differences in the 3-year rates of MACE (from RA to DIR: 17.9%, 20.2%, 14.5%, 14.7%; p = .50) or ischemia-driven revascularization (from RA to DIR: 16.8%, 10.8%, 12.3%, 14.2%; p = .65). The adjusted 3-year rates of MACE did not differ according to LPS.

CONCLUSIONS

The comparable 3-year outcomes suggest that appropriate lesion preparation may be able to overcome the increased risks of complex LMCA lesion morphology.

Predictive value of pressure ulcer risk for obstructive coronary artery disease

AIM

To investigate the relationship between pressure ulcers risk and severity of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) by invasive coronary angiography.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

METHODS

A total of 193 consecutive patients with underlying pressure ulcers risk who underwent invasive coronary angiography were enrolled. Subjects were divided into three groups according to severity of coronary artery stenosis. Pressure ulcers risk score, fall risk score, self-care ability score and cardiovascular risk factors were compared among the three groups. Multivariate regression analysis and receiver operating curve analysis were performed to explore the diagnostic value of Braden score for left main or three-vessel disease.

RESULTS

Patients with more severe CAD had higher pressure ulcers risk. The percentage of high-pressure ulcers risk was highest in left main or three-vessel disease group, compared with control group and single- or two-vessel disease group. After adjusting for age, body mass index, diabetes, chronic kidney disease and other confounding factors, Braden score was an independent predictor of left main or three-vessel disease. Moreover, higher Braden score had a moderate area under the curve for excluding more severe CAD. In conclusion, among patients planning for coronary angiography, pressure ulcers risk assessment is conducive to predict the severity of obstructive CAD.

Therapeutic Options for Left Main, Left Main Equivalent, and Three-Vessel Disease

Patients with left main, left main equivalent, and three-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD) represent an overlapping spectrum of patients with advanced CAD that is associated with an adverse prognosis. Guideline-directed medical therapy is a necessary but often insufficient treatment option, as such patients frequently need mechanical revascularization by either coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In patients with advanced CAD presenting with acute myocardial infarction, PCI, of course, is the preferred treatment option. For stable patients with advanced CAD, CABG surgery remains the standard of care. However, observations from the SYNergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial suggest that PCI may be a useful alternative in patients with three-vessel disease with a low SYNTAX score as well as in patients with left main disease and a low or intermediate SYNTAX score. In the subset of patients with diabetes mellitus, the Future Revascularization Evaluation in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: Optimal Management of Multivessel Disease trial unequivocally demonstrated the superiority of CABG surgery in improving outcomes. The findings of the recently published Everolimus-Eluting Stent System versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization and Nordic-Baltic-British Left Main Revascularization study trials point to a favorable role for PCI in certain low-to-moderate risk patients with left main stem disease.

Accuracy of the PARIS score and PCI complexity to predict ischemic events in patients treated with very thin stents in unprotected left main or coronary bifurcations

BACKGROUND

The PARIS risk score (PARIS-rs) and percutaneous coronary intervention complexity (PCI-c) predict clinical and procedural residual ischemic risk following PCI. Their accuracy in patients undergoing unprotected left main (ULM) or bifurcation PCI has not been assessed.

METHODS

The predictive performances of the PARIS-rs (categorized as low, intermediate, and high) and PCI-c (according to guideline-endorsed criteria) were evaluated in 3,002 patients undergoing ULM/bifurcation PCI with very thin strut stents.

RESULTS

After 16 (12-22) months, increasing PARIS-rs (8.8% vs. 14.1% vs. 27.4%, p < .001) and PCI-c (15.2% vs. 11%, p = .025) were associated with higher rates of major adverse cardiac events ([MACE], a composite of death, myocardial infarction [MI], and target vessel revascularization), driven by MI/death for PARIS-rs and target lesion revascularization/stent thrombosis for PCI-c (area under the curves for MACE: PARIS-rs 0.60 vs. PCI-c 0.52, p-for-difference < .001). PCI-c accuracy for MACE was higher in low-clinical-risk patients; while PARIS-rs was more accurate in low-procedural-risk patients. ≥12-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) was associated with a lower MACE rate in high PARIS-rs patients, (adjusted-hazard ratio 0.42 [95% CI: 0.22-0.83], p = .012), with no benefit in low to intermediate PARIS-rs patients. No incremental benefit with longer DAPT was observed in complex PCI.

CONCLUSIONS

In the setting of ULM/bifurcation PCI, the residual ischemic risk is better predicted by a clinical risk estimator than by PCI complexity, which rather appears to reflect stent/procedure-related events. Careful procedural risk estimation is warranted in patients at low clinical risk, where PCI complexity may substantially contribute to the overall residual ischemic risk.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Surgery for Unprotected Left Main Disease: EXCEL Trial at 5 Years

Although coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery traditionally has been considered the gold standard for left main revascularization, percutaneous coronary intervention has evolved in the past decades so that it now represents a valid alternative to CABG in a large proportion of cases. The landmark Evaluation of XIENCE versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization (EXCEL) trial is the largest contemporary randomized comparison assessing the impact of revascularization strategies for left main disease. This review discusses the background, rationale, design, results, and implications of the EXCEL trial.

Validation of bifurcation DEFINITION criteria and comparison of stenting strategies in true left main bifurcation lesions

There are controversies on optimal stenting strategy regarding true left main (LM) bifurcation lesions. The present study compared 1- and 2-stenting strategy for patients with true LM bifurcation lesions as differentiated by DEFINITION criteria. 928 patients with true LM bifurcation lesions (Medina 1,1,1 or 0,1,1) treated with DES were enrolled consecutively. 297 (32.0%) patients were identified as complex LM bifurcation, and 631 (68.0%) patients into simple LM bifurcation group according to DEFINTION criteria. Patients in complex vs. simple LM bifurcation group had significantly higher major adverse cardiac event (MACE, including cardiac death, myocardial infarction [MI] and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization) rate at 30 days (7.8% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.01), 1 year (10.3% vs. 6.4%, p = 0.04), and numerically at 3 years (14.2% vs. 10.1%, p = 0.07), which was mainly driven by increased MI. Moreover, patients in the 2-stent strategy group had strong trend towards lower incidence of cardiac death in both complex LM bifurcation group (2.0% vs. 5.9%, p = 0.08) and simple LM bifurcation group (1.9% vs. 4.5%, p = 0.07). In conclusion, the complex bifurcation lesion criteria established in DEFINITION study was able to risk-stratify LM bifurcation patients. Two-stent technique yielded numerically lower 3-year cardiac mortality regardless of LM bifurcation complexity.

Evaluation of Left Main Coronary Artery Using Optical Frequency Domain Imaging and Its Pitfalls

Objectives

We aimed to assess the quality of optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI) of the left main (LM) arterial wall and describe and analyse potential artefacts in this setting.

Background

OFDI is increasingly used to assess ambiguous lesions and optimize LM percutaneous coronary intervention. However, its ability to provide artefact-free high-quality images of coronary ostia and large segments such as the LM remains uncertain.

Methods

We included 42 consecutive patients who underwent OFDI, including LM imaging. Each OFDI frame was subdivided into four quadrants and analysed. The number of quadrants with artifacts was calculated within the proximal, mid, and distal LM and the first 5 mm of the left anterior descending artery (LAD) and/or left circumflex artery (LCX).

Results

The quadrants analysis showed an overall artifact rate of 8.9%, mostly out-of-field (45.1%) or residual blood (44.7%) artefacts. Most artifacts were located in the proximal LM (18.6%) with a stepwise reduction of artifact rates towards distal segments (mid LM 5.8%; distal LM 3.6%, ostial LAD 2.6%, and ostial LCX 0%; p < 0.001). While 20 (48.8%) patients had angiographically visible plaques, OFDI showed plaques in 32 patients (76.2%; p=0.007).

Conclusion

OFDI can accurately evaluate the LM and detect and assess angiographically unvisualized atherosclerotic plaques providing accurate assessment of >90% of the quadrants of the LM and the ostia of its bifurcation branches. However, artifacts mainly located in the proximal LM and decreasing distally in a stepwise fashion should be considered in the interpretation of OFDI in this setting.

Left main coronary artery disease: when and how to perform PCI?

Left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease has been reported in up to 10% of all patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and in the majority of cases are associated with severe three-vessel CAD. Among patients with chronic coronary syndrome revascularization of significant LMCA disease improves prognosis, while there is a debate about which revascularization strategy, CABG surgery or percutaneous coronary interventions to use. We do a review of the available evidence about the impact of LMCA lesions on patient prognosis according to CAD extension and clinical presentation, the outcome after percutaneous or surgical revascularization, the procedural challenges of LMCA PCI and the available armamentarium to optimally treat this relevant population.

Prognostic Effects of Treatment Strategies for Left Main Versus Non-Left Main Bifurcation Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Current-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent

Background:

Although 1-stent with provisional approach is the preferred strategy for the treatment of bifurcation lesions, the optimal treatment strategy according to lesion location is still debatable. This study aimed to identify whether clinical outcomes according to treatment strategy differed between left main (LM) and non-LM bifurcation lesions in the second-generation drug-eluting stent era.

Methods:

The Coronary Bifurcation Stenting registry III is a retrospective multicenter registry of 2648 patients with bifurcation lesions who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation drug-eluting stent. Among the study population, 935 (35.3%) patients had an LM bifurcation lesion. The primary outcome was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization.

Results:

Median follow-up duration was 53 months. LM bifurcation was associated with a higher risk of target lesion failure (HR adj , 1.846 [95% CI, 1.317–2.588]; P <0.001) than non-LM bifurcation. Two-stent strategy was more frequently applied in patients with LM bifurcation than in patients with non-LM bifurcation (27.1% versus 11.7%; P <0.001). In the LM bifurcation group, compared with the 1-stent strategy, the 2-stent strategy showed a significantly higher risk of target lesion failure (2-stent versus 1-stent, 17.4% versus 10.6%; HR adj , 1.848 [95% CI, 1.045–3.266]; P =0.035), mainly driven by the higher rate of target lesion revascularization (15.3% versus 5.5%; HR adj , 2.698 [95% CI, 1.276–5.706]; P =0.009). However, the risk of cardiac death or myocardial infarction did not differ between the 2 groups (4.4% versus 6.6%; HR adj , 0.694 [95% CI, 0.306–1.572]; P =0.381). For patients with non-LM-bifurcation, there was no significant difference in the rate of target lesion failure between 1-stent and 2-stent strategies (5.6% versus 6.3%; HR adj , 0.925 [95% CI, 0.428–2.001]; P =0.843).

Conclusions:

Even in the second-generation drug-eluting stent era, the 1-stent strategy, if possible, should initially be considered the preferred approach for the treatment of LM bifurcation lesions.

Registration:

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT03068494.

Contemporary Use and Trends in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States: An Analysis of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Research to Practice Initiative

Importance

Recent data support percutaneous revascularization as an alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting in unprotected left main (ULM) coronary lesions. However, the relevance of these trials to current practice is unclear, as patterns and outcomes of ULM percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in contemporary US clinical practice are not well studied.

Objective

To define the current practice of ULM PCI and its outcomes and compare these with findings reported in clinical trials.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional multicenter analysis included data collected from 1662 institutions participating in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) CathPCI Registry between April 2009 and July 2016. Data were collected from 33 128 patients undergoing ULM PCI and 3 309 034 patients undergoing all other PCI. Data were analyzed from June 2017 to May 2018.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Patient and procedural characteristics and their temporal trends were compared between ULM PCI and all other PCI. In-hospital major adverse clinical events (ie, death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and emergent coronary artery bypass grafting) were compared using hierarchical logistic regression. Characteristics and outcomes were also compared against clinical trial cohorts.

Results

Of the 3 342 162 included patients, 2 223 570 (66.5%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 64.2 (12.1) years. Unprotected left main PCI represented 1.0% (33 128 of 3 342 162) of all procedures, modestly increasing from 0.7% to 1.3% over time. The mean (SD) annualized ULM PCI volume was 0.5 (1.5) procedures for operators and 3.2 (6.1) procedures for facilities, with only 1808 of 10 971 operators (16.5%) and 892 of 1662 facilities (53.7%) performing an average of 1 or more ULM PCI annually. After adjustment, major adverse clinical events occurred more frequently with ULM PCI compared with all other PCI (odds ratio, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.39-1.53). Compared with clinical trial populations, patients in the CathPCI Registry were older with more comorbid conditions, and adverse events were more frequent.

Conclusions and Relevance

Use of ULM PCI has increased over time, but overall use remains low. These findings suggest that ULM PCI occurs infrequently in the United States and in an older and more comorbid population than that seen in clinical trials.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Graft in Left Main Revascularisation

Collapse

Revascularization for Coronary Artery Disease: Principle and Challenges

Coronary revascularization is the most important strategy for coronary artery disease. This review summarizes the current most prevalent approaches for coronary revascularization and discusses the evidence on the mechanisms, indications, techniques, and outcomes of these approaches. Targeting coronary thrombus, fibrinolysis is indicated for patients with diagnosed myocardial infarction and without high risk of severe hemorrhage. The development of fibrinolytic agents has improved the outcomes of ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Percutaneous coronary intervention has become the most frequently performed procedure for coronary artery disease. The evolution of stents plays an important role in the result of the procedure. Coronary artery bypass grafting is the most effective revascularization approach for stenotic coronary arteries. The choice of conduits and surgical techniques are important determinants of patient outcomes. Multidisciplinary decision-making should analyze current evidence, considering the clinical condition of patients, and determine the safety and necessity for coronary revascularization with either PCI or CABG. For coronary artery disease with more complex lesions like left main disease and multivessel disease, CABG results in more complete revascularization than PCI. Furthermore, comorbidities, such as heart failure and diabetes, are always correlated with adverse clinical events, and a routine invasive strategy should be recommended. For patients under revascularization, secondary prevention therapies are also of important value for the prevention of subsequent adverse events.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Left Main Coronary Disease in New Zealand: National Linkage Study of Characteristics and In-Hospital Outcomes (ANZACS-QI 38)

BACKGROUND

Approximately 5% of coronary angiographies detect LMS disease >50%. Recent randomized trials showed PCI has comparable outcomes to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in low or intermediate risk candidates. In clinical practice, PCI is frequently utilized in those with prohibitive surgical risk. We reviewed contemporary national results of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for left main coronary disease (LMS) disease in New Zealand.

METHODS

All patients undergoing PCI for LMS disease from 01/09/2014-24/09/2017 were extracted from the All New Zealand Acute Coronary Syndrome-Quality Improvement registry with national dataset linkage, analyzing characteristics and in-hospital outcomes.

RESULTS

The cohort included 469 patients, mean age 70.8 ± 10.7 years, male 331 (71%), and the majority 339 (72%) were unprotected LMS. Indications include ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) 83 (18%) and NSTEMI or unstable angina 229 (49%). Compared with protected LMS, unprotected LMS were more likely to present with an acute coronary syndrome (73% versus 48%, P < 0.001), and to die in-hospital (9.4% versus 3.9%, P = 0.045). In those with unprotected LMS, in-hospital mortality after acute STEMI PCI was higher than for other indications (21.1% versus 6.1%, P < 0.001). Independent predictors of in-hospital death and major adverse cardiovascular events included STEMI, femoral access and worse renal function.

CONCLUSION

Our LMS PCI cohort had high mortality rates, especially those presenting with STEMI and an unprotected LMS. This reflects the contemporary real-world practice of LMS PCI being predominantly performed in high risk patients which differs from randomized trial populations, and this should be considered before comparing with CABG outcomes.

Intravascular ultrasound-guided drug-eluting stent implantation for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery lesions: A single-center randomized trial

Objective:

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has developed as a preferable choice for optimizing the stenting procedures mainly because it will have good access to vessel size, lesion length, or severity accurately. However, it still remains unclear about the benefits of IVUS guidance in drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes with respect to IVUS-guided DES implantation for these patients.

Methods:

A total of 336 consecutive patients from December 2010 to December 2015 were enrolled in the study. The patients were then randomly assigned into two groups: IVUS-guided group (n=167) and control group (n=169). The primary endpoint was the incidence of composite major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR). The risk of stent thrombosis (ST) was chosen as the safety endpoint.

Results:

After a 1-year follow-up, the occurrence of composite MACE in the IVUS-guided group was significantly lower than that in the control group (13.2% vs. 21.9%, p=0.031), which might mainly result from the significant reduction in the risk of cardiac death (1.8% vs. 5.9%, p=0.048). Dramatically, the risk of MI did not differ significantly between the two groups (11.4% vs. 13.6%, p=0.478), though a tended reduction in TVR was observed under IVUS guidance (4.2% vs. 8.9%, p=0.068). There was no statistical significance between the two groups with respect to the risk of target lesion revascularization (IVUS-guided vs. control: 1.2% vs. 3.0%, p=0.239) and ST (IVUS-guided vs. control: 1.2% vs. 3.0%, p=0.246).

Conclusion:

The possible feasibility of IVUS-guided DES implantation for patients with ULMCA stenosis was supported by the present study. Larger and more powerful randomized trials were still warranted to research the whole benefits of IVUS guidance for these patients.

Revascularization Strategies for Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is an urgent medical condition that requires prompt application of simultaneous pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic therapies. The variation in patient clinical characteristics coupled with the multitude of treatment modalities makes optimal and timely management challenging. This review summarizes risk stratification of patients, the role and timing of revascularization, and highlights important considerations in the revascularization approach with attention to individual patient characteristics.

RECENT FINDINGS

The early invasive management of NSTEMI has fostered a reduction in future ischemic events. Risk calculators are helpful in determining which patients should receive early invasive management. As many patients have multivessel disease, identifying the true culprit lesion can be challenging. Special attention should be given to those at the highest risk, such as diabetics, patients with renal failure, and those with left main disease. In patients with acute coronary syndrome, the decision and mode of revascularization should carefully integrate the patient's clinical characteristics as well as the complexity of the coronary anatomy.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Stenosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article reviews the latest data on unprotected left main (ULM) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, with a focus on the NOBLE and EXCEL trials.

RECENT FINDINGS

In EXCEL trial, the primary endpoint at 3 years was 15.4% in the PCI group and 14.7% in the CABG group (p = 0.02 for non-inferiority of PCI versus CABG). In NOBLE, the primary endpoint at 5 years was 28% and 18% for PCI and CABG, respectively (HR 1.51, CI 1.13-2.0, which did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority of PCI to CABG; p for superiority of CABG was 0.0044). Higher repeat revascularization and non-procedural myocardial infarction were noted in PCI group but there was no difference in all-cause or cardiac mortality between the two groups. A heart team approach with appropriate patient selection, careful assessment of LM lesions, and meticulous procedural technique makes PCI a valid alternative to CABG for ULM stenosis.

Percutaneous coronary intervention vs. coronary artery bypass grafting for left main revascularization: an updated meta-analysis

Aims

The optimal revascularization strategy for left main coronary artery disease (LMD) remains controversial, especially with two recent randomized controlled trials showing conflicting results. We sought to address this controversy with our analysis.

Methods and results

Comprehensive literature search was performed. We compared percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for LMD revascularization using standard meta-analytic techniques. A 21% higher risk of long-term major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event [MACCE; composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and repeat revascularization] was observed in patients undergoing PCI in comparison with CABG [risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.40]. This risk was driven by higher rate of repeat revascularization in those undergoing PCI (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.34-1.95). On the contrary, MACCE rates at 30 days were lower in PCI when compared with CABG (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39-0.76), which was driven by lower rates of stroke in the PCI arm (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.17-0.98). At 1 year, lower stroke rates (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.08-0.59) in the PCI arm were balanced by higher repeat revascularization rates in those undergoing PCI (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.33-2.37), resulting in a clinical equipoise in MACCE rates between the two revascularization strategies. There was no difference in death or MI between PCI when compared with CABG at any time point.

Conclusion

Outcomes of CABG vs. PCI for LMD revascularization vary over time. Therefore, individualized decisions need to be made for LMD revascularization using the heart team approach.

Percutaneous Left Main Coronary Intervention: A Review of Plaque Modification in Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis has long been recognized as a marker of increased morbidity and mortality. Current treatment algorithms for LMCA stenosis consider both percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug eluting stents (DES) and coronary bypass surgery, each with advantages based on individual patient characteristics. Since the LMCA is the largest artery in the coronary tree, plaque volume and calcification is greater than other coronary segments and often extends to the distal bifurcation segment. In LMCA bifurcation lesions, larger minimal stent area is strongly associated with better outcome in the DES era. Plaque modification strategies such as rotational, orbital, or laser atherectomy are effective mechanisms to reduce plaque volume and alter compliance, facilitating stent delivery and stent expansion. We present a case of a calcified, medina class 1,1,1 LMCA lesion where intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and orbital atherectomy were employed for optimal results. In this context, we review the evidence of plaque modification devices and the rationale for their use in unprotected left main PCI.

Operator Experience and Outcomes After Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review was performed with the goal of summarizing the role of operator experience in the treatment of severe left main stenosis by percutaneous intervention techniques.

RECENT FINDINGS

The Evaluation of XIENCE versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization (EXCEL) trial demonstrated that percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting had similar clinical outcomes for severe left main disease. However, PCI of the left main coronary stenosis is considered to be a high-risk intervention because of the large area of myocardium at jeopardy that can quickly cause hemodynamic compromise. Operator experience and familiarity with the use of hemodynamic support devices, plaque modification techniques, and intravascular imaging tools is associated with better clinical outcomes. In patients with severe left main stenosis undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention by high-volume operators, the clinical outcomes are superior.

Meta-analysis study comparing percutaneous coronary intervention/drug eluting stent versus coronary artery bypass surgery of unprotected left main coronary artery disease: Clinical outcomes during short-term versus long-term (> 1 year) follow-up

BACKGROUND

Results on the safety and long-term efficacy of drug-eluting stent placement in unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCAD) compared with those of coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) remain inconsistent across randomized clinical trials and recent meta-analysis studies. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and safety over short- and long-term follow-ups by conducting a meta-analysis of large pooled data from randomized controlled trials and up-to-date observational studies.

METHODS

A systematic review of PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, and reference lists of related articles was performed for studies conducted in the drug-eluting stent era, to compare percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with CABG in ULMCAD. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, all-cause mortality, and revascularization after at least 1-year follow-up. In-hospital and 30-day clinical outcomes were considered secondary outcomes. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis of studies with ≥5 years follow-up was performed to test the sustainability of clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies were extracted with 21,832 patients (10,424 in PCI vs 11,408 in CABG). Pooled analysis demonstrated remarkable differences in long-term follow-up (≥1 year) MACCE (odds ratio [OR] 1.42, 95% CI 1.27-1.59), P < .00001), repeat revascularization (OR 3.00, 95% CI 2.41-3.73, P < .00001), and MI (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.14-1.53, P = .0002), favoring CABG over PCI. However, stroke risk was significantly lower in the PCI group. Subgroup analysis of studies with ≥5 years follow-up showed similar outcomes except for the noninferiority outcome of MACCE in the PCI arm. However, the PCI group proved good safety profile after a minimum of 30-day follow-up with lower MACCE outcome.

CONCLUSION

PCI for ULMCAD can be applied with attentiveness in carefully selected patients. MI and the need for revascularization remain drawbacks and areas of concern among previous studies. Nonetheless, it has been proven safe during short-term follow-up.

Findings of Single-Photon Emission Computed Tomography and Its Relation with Quantitative Coronary Angiography in Patients with Significant Stenosis of the Left Main Coronary Artery

Objective

Unrecognized left main coronary artery disease (LMCD) is often fatal; however, accuracy of non-invasive tests for diagnosing LMCD is still unsatisfactory. This study was performed to elucidate single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) detection of LMCD using quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) data.

Materials and Methods

Fifty-five patients (39 men; mean age, 68.1 ± 10.9 years) diagnosed with significant left main (LM) stenosis (≥ 50%) by invasive coronary angiography (ICA) were retrospectively reviewed. All study patients underwent SPECT with pharmacologic stress within 30 days of ICA. All coronary lesions were quantified via QCA, and SPECT findings were compared with QCA results.

Results

Only four patients (7.3%) had isolated LMCD; all others had combined significant stenosis (≥ 70%) of one or more other epicardial coronary arteries. Patients with more severe coronary artery disease tended to have higher values for summed difference scores in a greater number of regions, but the specific pattern was not clearly defined. Summed stress score of SPECT did not differ according to LM stenosis severity. Only three patients (5.4%) had a typical LM pattern of reversible perfusion defect on SPECT. A significant negative linear correlation between stenosis severity and stress perfusion percent was found in the left anterior descending artery region (r = −0.455, p < 0.001) but not in the left circumflex artery.

Conclusion

Single-photon emission computed tomography findings were heterogeneous, not specific and poorly correlated to QCA data in patients with significant LMCD. This may be due to highly prevalent significant stenosis of other epicardial coronary arteries.

Revascularization for Left Main and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Current Status and Future Prospects after the EXCEL and NOBLE Trials

Revascularization of severe left main and multivessel coronary artery disease has been shown to improve survival in both stable ischemic heart disease and acute coronary syndrome. While revascularization with coronary artery bypass surgery for these disease entities carries class I recommendation in most current guidelines, recent trials has shown potential comparable survival and cardiovascular outcomes between percutaneous and surgical interventions in patients with less complex coronary anatomy. Despite the conflicting results observed in the most recent left main revascularization trials, Everolimus-Eluting Stents or Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease (EXCEL) and Nordic-Baltic-British left main revascularization (NOBLE), both treatment strategies remain important for the management of left main disease (LMD) and multivessel disease (MVD) reflecting on the importance of heart team discussion. This review is focused on revascularization of LMD and MVD in patients who are not presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, encompassing the evidence from historic and contemporary trials which shaped up current practices. This review discusses the heart team approach to guide decision making, including special populations that are not represented in clinical trials.

Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafts for Left Main Coronary Disease: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Randomised Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Revascularisation of left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease can be potentially managed with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). Recent randomised controlled trial (RCT) data have added to the literature on this subject and this meta-analysis aims to assess the state of the data to assist in guiding patient treatment decisions.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of Cochrane Library, EMBASE, OVID, and PubMed Medline was performed. Randomised controlled trials of patients with LMCA disease undergoing PCI with drug eluting stents or CABG were included. Clinical outcomes and adverse events were assessed and analysed.

RESULTS

Four suitable RCTs of adequate quality and follow-up were identified. The incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at 3 to 5 years of follow-up was significantly increased with PCI compared to CABG (23.3% vs 18.2%, OR 1.37; 95% CI: 1.18-1.58; p=<0.0001; I²=0%) and was largely driven by more repeat revascularisation procedures among patients treated with PCI. There was no statistically significant difference in rates of mortality, myocardial infarction or stroke (either individually or when these outcomes were combined as a composite endpoint).

CONCLUSIONS

Coronary artery bypass grafting and PCI both represent reasonable treatment modalities for LMCA disease in appropriately selected patients. However, where CABG is feasible it offers superior long-term freedom from repeat revascularisation. Longer-term follow-up is required to further clarify the durability of mortality outcomes, especially in patients treated with PCI.

Double Kissing Crush Versus Provisional Stenting for Left Main Distal Bifurcation Lesions: DKCRUSH-V Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Provisional stenting (PS) is the most common technique used to treat distal left main (LM) bifurcation lesions in patients with unprotected LM coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The double kissing (DK) crush planned 2-stent technique has been shown to improve clinical outcomes in non-LM bifurcations compared with PS, and in LM bifurcations compared with culotte stenting, but has never been compared with PS in LM bifurcation lesions.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to determine whether a planned DK crush 2-stent technique is superior to PS for patients with true distal LM bifurcation lesions.

METHODS

The authors randomized 482 patients from 26 centers in 5 countries with true distal LM bifurcation lesions (Medina 1,1,1 or 0,1,1) to PS (n = 242) or DK crush stenting (n = 240). The primary endpoint was the 1-year composite rate of target lesion failure (TLF): cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. Routine 13-month angiographic follow-up was scheduled after ascertainment of the primary endpoint.

RESULTS

TLF within 1 year occurred in 26 patients (10.7%) assigned to PS, and in 12 patients (5.0%) assigned to DK crush (hazard ratio: 0.42; 95% confidence interval: 0.21 to 0.85; p = 0.02). Compared with PS, DK crush also resulted in lower rates of target vessel myocardial infarction I (2.9% vs. 0.4%; p = 0.03) and definite or probable stent thrombosis (3.3% vs. 0.4%; p = 0.02). Clinically driven target lesion revascularization (7.9% vs. 3.8%; p = 0.06) and angiographic restenosis within the LM complex (14.6% vs. 7.1%; p = 0.10) also tended to be less frequent with DK crush compared with PS. There was no significant difference in cardiac death between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present multicenter randomized trial, percutaneous coronary intervention of true distal LM bifurcation lesions using a planned DK crush 2-stent strategy resulted in a lower rate of TLF at 1 year than a PS strategy. (Double Kissing and Double Crush Versus Provisional T Stenting Technique for the Treatment of Unprotected Distal Left Main True Bifurcation Lesions: A Randomized, International, Multi-Center Clinical Trial [DKCRUSH-V]; ChiCTR-TRC-11001213).

The Surgical Treatment of Coronary Artery Occlusive Disease: Modern Treatment Strategies for an Age Old Problem

Coronary artery disease remains a formidable challenge to clinicians. Percutaneous interventions and surgical techniques for myocardial revascularization continue to improve. Concurrently, in light of emerging data, multiple practice guidelines have been published guiding clinicians in their therapeutic decisions. The multidisciplinary Heart Team concept needs to be embraced by all cardiovascular providers to optimize patient outcomes.

Real-world supported unprotected left main percutaneous coronary intervention with impella device; data from the USpella registry

BACKGROUND

Patients with left main (LM) coronary artery disease are increasingly being treated with percutaneous revascularization (PCI). The safety, feasibility, and efficacy of unprotected LM intervention (ULMI) with hemodynamic support by Impella device have not been evaluated previously.

OBJECTIVE

Using a large retrospective single center database from the USpella registry, we evaluated the safety, feasibility, and potential benefits of periprocedural left ventricular assist with axial flow Impella 2.5 and Impella CP (Abiomed Inc. Danvers, Mass) during ULMI.

METHODS

We analyzed a total of 127 consecutive patients who received hemodynamic support with Impella (2.5 or CP) for ULMI from August 2008 to July 2015. Safety, feasibility and efficacy end points included procedural success rates, in-hospital and 30-day major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) rates.

RESULTS

Among 127 patients who received hemodynamic support for ULMI (mean age 69.98 ± 10.7 years, 71% men, and mean left ventricular ejection fraction 28.74 ± 15.55%, Society of Thoracic Surgeons' mortality/morbidity 4/23%) the in-hospital and 30 days mortality rates were 1.43% (2/140) and 2.1% (3/141), respectively. The average baseline and post PCI (residual) syntax scores were 31.4 and 7.86, respectively, (P < 0.001). Only one patient (0.8%) had vascular complication that required surgery; 2.36% (3/127) had hematoma and 3.9% (5/127) had bleeding that required transfusion.

CONCLUSION

This large singe center retrospective evaluation of USpella registry substantiates and strongly supports the feasibility, safety, and hemodynamic usefulness of Impella device for ULMI with acceptable in-hospital and 30-day MACE rates. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Impact of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation on long-term clinical outcomes in patients with left main coronary artery stenosis

BACKGROUND

Cardiac rehabilitation may reduce cardiovascular mortality and morbidity rates in patients with coronary artery disease. The specific relationship between cardiac rehabilitation participation and left main coronary artery stenosis is unknown.

DESIGN

Prospective registry analysis.

METHODS

Data from a registry of 3120 patients with left main coronary artery stenosis, collected between 1995 and 2010, were analyzed. A total of 596 patients (19.6%) had participated in a cardiac rehabilitation program.

RESULTS

The crude seven-year mortality, cardiovascular mortality, target-vessel revascularization and myocardial infarction rates were significantly lower in the cardiac rehabilitation than in the non-rehabilitation group, and the incidence of stroke tended to be lower in the cardiac rehabilitation group. Multivariate analysis showed that cardiac rehabilitation was associated with significantly lower risks of mortality (hazard ratio (HR), 0.70; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.49-1.00; p = 0.05) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.48-0.97; p = 0.03). However, the adjusted HR of myocardial infarction, target-vessel revascularization and stroke did not differ significantly. Propensity score-matched analysis of 507 pairs showed that cardiac rehabilitation was associated with significant decreases in mortality (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.43-0.89; p = 0.009) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.36-0.80; p = 0.002) but had no beneficial effects on myocardial infarction, target-vessel revascularization or stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation participation was associated with significant decreases in mortality. Our findings show that cardiac rehabilitation programs should be implemented in standard management for patients with left main coronary artery stenosis.

Image-based quantification of 3D morphology for bifurcations in the left coronary artery: Application to stent design

BACKGROUND

Improved strategies for stent-based treatment of coronary artery disease at bifurcations require a greater understanding of artery morphology.

OBJECTIVE

We developed a workflow to quantify morphology in the left main coronary (LMCA), left anterior descending (LAD), and left circumflex (LCX) artery bifurcations.

METHODS

Computational models of each bifurcation were created for 55 patients using computed tomography images in 3D segmentation software. Metrics including cross-sectional area, length, eccentricity, taper, curvature, planarity, branching law parameters, and bifurcation angles were assessed using open-sources software and custom applications. Geometric characterization was performed by comparison of means, correlation, and linear discriminant analysis (LDA).

RESULTS

Differences between metrics suggest dedicated or multistent approaches should be tailored for each bifurcation. For example, the side branch of the LCX (i.e., obtuse marginal; OM) was longer than that of the LMCA (i.e., LCXprox) and LAD (i.e., first diagonal; D1). Bifurcation metrics for some locations (e.g., LMCA Finet ratio) provide results and confidence intervals agreeing with prior findings, while revised metric values are presented for others (e.g., LAD and LCX). LDA revealed several metrics that differentiate between artery locations (e.g., LMCA vs. D1, LMCA vs. OM, LADprox vs. D1, and LCXprox vs. D1).

CONCLUSIONS

These results provide a foundation for elucidating common parameters from healthy coronary arteries and could be leveraged in the future for treating diseased arteries. Collectively the current results may ultimately be used for design iterations that improve outcomes following implantation of future dedicated bifurcation stents. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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.

The EXCEL and NOBLE trials: similarities, contrasts and future perspectives for left main revascularisation

Unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis has relatively high prevalence and exposes patients to a high risk for adverse cardiovascular events. The optimal revascularisation strategy (coronary artery bypass surgery [CABG] or percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]) for patients with complex coronary artery disease is a topic of continuing debate. The introduction of the newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) -with documented improvements in both safety and efficacy- has prompted the interventional community to design two new dedicated randomised trials comparing CABG and PCI: the NOBLE (Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Vs Drug Eluting Stent Percutaneous Coronary Angioplasty in the Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Stenosis) and EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Everolimus Eluting Stent Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trials. The aims of the present review are to describe the similarities and contrasts between these two trials as well to explore their future implications in ULMCA treatment.