Fractional flow reserve guided versus angiographic guided surgical revascularization: A meta-analysis

Cardiac Surgery 2021 Reviewed

PubMed displayed more than 35,000 hits for the search term "cardiac surgery AND 2021." We used the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) approach and selected relevant publications for a results-oriented summary. As in recent years, we reviewed the fields of coronary and conventional valve surgery and their overlap with their interventional alternatives. COVID reduced cardiac surgical activity around the world. In the coronary field, the FAME 3 trial dominated publications by practically repeating SYNTAX, but with modern stents and fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). PCI was again unable to achieve non-inferiority compared with coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) in patients with triple-vessel disease. Survival advantages of CABG over PCI could be linked to a reduction in myocardial infarctions and current terminology was criticized because the term "myocardial revascularization" is not precise and does not reflect the infarct-preventing collateralization effect of CABG. In structural heart disease, new guidelines were published, providing upgrades of interventional treatments of both aortic and mitral valve disease. While for aortic stenosis, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) received a primary recommendation in older and high-risk patients; recommendations for transcatheter mitral edge-to-edge treatment were upgraded for patients considered inappropriate for surgery. For heart team discussions it is important to know that classic aortic valve replacement currently provides strong signals (from registry and randomized evidence) for a survival advantage over TAVI after 5 years. This article summarizes publications perceived as important by us. It can neither be complete nor free of individual interpretation, but provides up-to-date information for decision-making and patient information.

Gender-Based Long-Term Outcomes After Revascularization for Three-Vessel Coronary Disease: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis of a Large Cohort

Objective

To investigate the impact of gender on long-term outcomes after revascularization in patients with three-vessel disease (TVD), a severe and challenging subtype of coronary artery disease.

Methods

This was a single center retrospective cohort study. A total of 3776 patients with TVD who underwent revascularization between 2013 and 2018 were analyzed and were divided into the female group (n = 1039, 27.5%) and the male group (n = 2737, 72.5%). We performed a 1:2 propensity score matching (PSM) to balance the baseline characteristics, and a total of 1506 (504 matched pairs) patients were created after undertaking PSM. The primary outcome was the frequency of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) including all-cause death, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, stroke, and readmission for angina pectoris or heart failure. The secondary outcome was the incidence of all-cause death.

Results

Through 2.4-year follow-up, no significant differences in MACCE (25.8% vs 27.5%, p = 0.279) and all-cause death (2.1% vs 2.2%, p = 0.888) were observed between the two cohorts. Similar results as with the early detection were obtained in propensity-matched patients. Multivariable analysis revealed that female gender (hazard ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.88–1.17, p = 0.820) was not an independent predictor of MACCE but percutaneous coronary intervention (compared with coronary artery bypass graft surgery), hypertension, diabetes mellitus, atrial fibrillation, left main trunk involvement and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% were independently associated with a higher MACCE rate in these patients.

Conclusion

For patients with TVD after coronary revascularization, there were no gender-based differences in the long-term outcomes and female gender was not an independent predictor of MACCE.

Fractional Flow Reserve: Patient Selection and Perspectives

The aim of this review was to discuss the current practice and patient selection for invasive FFR, new techniques to estimate invasive FFR and future of coronary physiology tests. We elaborate on the indication and application of FFR and on the contraindications and concerns in certain patient populations.

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.