Effect of Age and Sex on Outcomes After Stenting or Bypass Surgery in Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery by-pass grafting in premature coronary artery disease: What is the evidence? -A narrative review

Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains one of the leading causes of death globally. In the United States of America, in 2016, 19% of all patients under the age of 65 died of cardiovascular disease despite improvements in primary prevention. The premature clinical onset of symptoms in the young population (<60 years) is much more aggressive than in the older population, and the overall long-term prognosis is poor. CAD appears to have a rapidly progressive form in those under the age of 60 due to genetic predisposition, smoking, and substance abuse, however, the ideal management strategy is still yet to be established. The two primary methods of establishing coronary revascularization are percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). Despite the increasing prevalence of CAD in the young population, they are consistently underrepresented in major randomized clinical trials of each revascularization strategy. Both CABG and PCI are known to have similar survival rates, but PCI is associated with higher repeat revascularization rate. Many argue this may be due to the progressive nature of CAD combined with the vessel patency time required in a patient under 60 with potentially another 20-30 years of life. There is little in literature regarding the outcomes of these various revascularization strategies in populations under 60 years with CAD. This review summarises the current evidence for each revascularisation strategy in patients under the age of 60 and suggests future avenues of research for this unique age group.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Revascularization of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

Owing to a large-jeopardized myocardium, left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) represents the substantial high-risk anatomical subset of obstructive coronary artery disease. For several decades, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been the "gold standard" treatment for LMCAD. Along with advances in CABG, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has also dramatically evolved over time in conjunction with advances in the stent or device technology, adjunct pharmacotherapy, accumulated experiences, and practice changes, establishing its position as a safe, reasonable treatment option for such a complex disease. Until recently, several randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, and observational registries comparing PCI and CABG for LMCAD have shown comparable long-term survival with tradeoffs between early and late risk-benefit of each treatment. Despite this, there are still several unmet issues for revascularization strategy and management for LMCAD. This review article summarized updated knowledge on evolution and clinical evidence on the treatment of LMCAD, with a focus on the comparison of state-of-the-art PCI with CABG.

Safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft in patients with STEMI and unprotected left main stem disease: A systematic review & meta-analysis

•

The advent of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has caused much debate about the optimal revascularization method for LMCAD.

•

Several studies have previously been conducted comparing PCI versus CABG for LMCAD, however most of these have only taken into account randomized controlled trials (RCTs), while ignoring observational studies.

•

This study takes data from both RCTs and observational studies to obtain a better comparison of the two revascularization techniques.

•

It is the first meta-analysis to report data for various adverse outcomes after 10 years of follow-up.

Introduction

Owing to its large area of supply, left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) has the highest mortality rate among coronary artery lesions, resulting in debate about its optimal revascularization technique. This meta-analysis compares percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for the treatment of LMCAD.

Method

MEDLINE, TRIP, and Cochrane Central databases were queried from their inception until 25 April 2021, to determine MACCE (major adverse cardiac and cardiovascular events), all-cause mortality, repeat revascularization, myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke rates post-revascularization for different follow-ups. 7 RCTs and 50 observational studies having 56,701 patients were included. A random-effects model was used with effect sizes calculated as odds ratios (odds ratio, OR).

Results

In the short term (1 year), PCI had significantly higher repeat revascularizations (OR = 3.58, 95% CI 2.47–5.20; p < 0.00001), but lower strokes (OR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.38–0.81; p = 0.002). In the intermediate term (2–5 years), PCI had significantly higher rates of repeat revascularizations (OR = 3.47, 95% CI 2.72–4.44; p < 0.00001) and MI (OR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.17–1.64; p = 0.0002), but significantly lower strokes (OR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.42–0.70; p < 0.0001). PCI also had significantly higher repeat revascularizations (OR = 2.58, 95% CI 1.89–3.52; p < 0.00001) in the long term (≥5 years), while in the very long term (≥10 years), PCI had significantly lower all-cause mortalities (OR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.61–0.96; p = 0.02).

Conclusion

PCI was safer than CABG for patients with stroke for most follow-ups, while CABG was associated with lower repeat revascularizations. However, further research is required to determine PCI’s safety over CABG for reducing post-surgery MI.

Sex-Specific Outcomes Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Left Main Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease differ between men and women.

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend either PCI or CABG for patients with unprotected LMCA disease and low-to-intermediate anatomical complexity. However, it is unclear whether these guidelines apply to women, who are underrepresented in clinical trials.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed to identify studies reporting sex-specific outcomes after PCI versus CABG in patients with LMCA disease. Trial level hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled by random-effects modelling.

RESULTS

Eight (8) studies met inclusion criteria, comprising 13,066 patients (24.3% women). In both sexes, there was no difference between PCI and CABG with respect to the primary composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction or stroke (HR in women: 1.03, 95% CI 0.76-1.40; HR in men: 1.04, 95% CI 0.92-1.17). However, both sexes were more likely to require repeat revascularisation after PCI. There was no interaction between sex and treatment effect for the primary composite endpoint nor for the individual outcomes of death, stroke and repeat revascularisation. However, in women the risk of myocardial infarction was higher after PCI compared with CABG (HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.06-3.18), with a trend toward the opposite in men (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.54-1.13; p-interaction=0.01).

CONCLUSION

Percutaneous coronary intervention and CABG have a comparable risk of the composite outcome of death, stroke or myocardial infarction in patients undergoing revascularisation for LMCA disease, with no significant interaction between sex and treatment effect.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

For several decades, coronary artery bypass grafting has been regarded as the standard choice of revascularization for significant left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. However, in conjunction with remarkable advancement of device technology and adjunctive pharmacology, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) offers a more expeditious approach with rapid recovery and is a safe and effective alternative in appropriately selected patients with LMCA disease. Several landmark randomized clinical trials showed that PCI with drug-eluting stents for LMCA disease is a safe option with similar long-term survival rates to coronary artery bypass grafting surgery, especially in those with low and intermediate anatomic risk. Although it is expected that the updated evidence from recent randomized clinical trials will determine the next guidelines for the foreseeable future, there are still unresolved and unmet issues of LMCA revascularization and PCI strategy. This paper provides a comprehensive review on the evolution and an update on the management of LMCA disease.

•

With advancements in PCI, clinical outcomes after left main PCI have progressively improved.

•

Unmet needs still exist between clinical practice and the current evidence for left main PCI.

•

Better decision making of revascularization choice and PCI optimization should be emphasized to improve outcomes of LMCA disease.

•

Further research will provide further evidence to resolve conflicting issues on left main PCI.

Time-Dependent Impact of Sex on the Long-Term Outcomes After Left Main Revascularization

Background

There are still limited data about the differential effect of sex on long‐term outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery disease. This extended follow‐up study of the MAIN‐COMPARE (Ten‐Year Outcomes of Stents Versus Coronary‐Artery Bypass Grafting for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) registry evaluated clinical outcomes beyond 10 years.

Methods and Results

Of 2240 patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease (PCI=1102 and CABG=1138), all‐cause mortality, the composite of death, Q‐wave myocardial infarction, or stroke, and target vessel revascularization were separately evaluated in both sexes. Of 2240 patients, 631 (28.2%) were women and 1609 (71.8%) were men. Women had lower 10‐year incidences of death and serious composite outcomes than men. The adjusted 10‐year risks of adverse outcomes were similar in men. However, the adjusted 10‐year risks were different according to a prespecified period in women. In the short‐term (0–1 year) period, PCI had a significantly lower risk for serious composite outcomes (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.19–0.91; P=0.03) compared with CABG. The adjusted risks for death and serious composite outcomes were significantly higher after PCI than after CABG, during the midterm (1–5 years) period (death; adjusted HR, 3.99; 95% CI, 2.01–7.92; P<0.001 and composite outcome; adjusted HR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.59–5.39; P=0.001). Beyond 5 years, adjusted risks were similar after PCI and CABG in women.

Conclusions

In this 10‐year extended follow‐up study of patients undergoing left main coronary artery revascularization, we observed a time‐dependent impact of sex on the long‐term outcomes after PCI and CABG, especially in women, with significant interactions. However, these results warrant confirmation on larger series of studies.

Registration

URl: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02791412.

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)

Does Age Affect the Short- and Long-Term Outcomes of Coronary Bypass Grafting?

The etiology of coronary artery disease (CAD) is multifactorial, stemming from both modifiable and nonmodifiable risk factors such as age. Several studies have reported the effects of age on various outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This article reviews age-related outcomes of CABG and offers direction for further studies in the field to create comprehensive, evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of CAD. Ninety-two primary sources were analyzed for relevance to the subject matter, of which 17 were selected for further analysis: 14 retrospective cohort studies, 2 randomized clinical trials, and 1 meta-analysis. Our review revealed four broad age ranges into which patients can be grouped: those with CAD (1) below the age of 40 years, (2) between the ages of 40 and 60 years, (3) between the ages of 60 and 80 years, and (4) at or above 80 years. Patients below the age of 40 years fare best overall with total arterial revascularization (TAR). Patients between the ages of 40 and 60 years also fare well with the use of multiarterial grafts (MAGs) whereas either MAGs or single-arterial grafts may be of significant benefit to patients at or above the age of 60 years, with younger and diabetic patients benefitting the most. Arterial grafting is superior to vein grafting until the age of 80 years, at which point there is promising evidence supporting the continued use of the saphenous vein as the favored graft substrate. Age is a factor affecting the outcomes of CABG but should not serve as a barrier to offering patients CABG at any age from either a cost or a health perspective. Operative intervention starts to show significant mortality consequences at the age of 80 years, but the increased risk is countered by maintenance or improvement to patients' quality of life.

Sex and gender differences in anesthesia: Relevant also for perioperative safety?

Sex (a biological determination) and gender (a social construct) are not interchangeable terms and both impact perioperative management and patient safety. Sex and gender differences in clinical phenotypes of chronic illnesses and risk factors for perioperative morbidity and mortality are relevant for preoperative evaluation and optimization. Sex-related differences in physiology, as well as in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of anesthetic drugs may influence the anesthesia plan, the management of pain, postoperative recovery, adverse effects, patient satisfaction, and outcomes. Further studies are needed to characterize outcome differences between men and women in non-cardiac, cardiac, and transplantation surgery in order to individualize perioperative management and improve patient safety. Transgender patients represent a vulnerable population who need special perioperative care. Gender balance increases team performance and may improve perioperative outcomes.

Sex Differences in Clinical Outcomes Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has emerged as a reasonable alternative to coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery in well-selected patients with unprotected left main coronary disease (LMCD). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis with the aim of assessing the impact of sex on outcomes of PCI in patients with unprotected LMCD.

METHODS

A systematic search of PUBMED, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases was performed to identify studies comparing the outcomes of men vs. women among patients undergoing PCI for unprotected LMCD. The primary outcome of interest was study defined major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), stent thrombosis and stroke. For all outcomes, pooled odds ratios (OR) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the DerSimonian-Laird random-effects model.

RESULTS

Six studies with a total of 6515 individuals (4954 men, 1561women) with a mean follow up of 36 months were included in the analysis. MACE and MI were significantly higher in women with OR of 1.17 (95% CI 1.01-1.36; p = 0.03) and 1.42 (95% CI 1.07-1.87; p = 0.01) respectively. All-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, and TLR were similar among men and women.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis suggests that women undergoing PCI for unprotected LMCD have higher rates of MACE and MI compared to men.

Gender Differences in Postoperative Outcomes After Cardiac Surgery

Women presenting for cardiac surgery tend to be older and have hypertension, diabetes, and overweight or underweight body mass index than men. Despite improvements in surgical techniques and medications, women have increased risk for morbidity and mortality after multiple types of cardiac surgery. Women presenting for transcatheter aortic valve replacement are older and frailer than men, and have increased risk of intraoperative complications, but lower mortality at mid- and long-term ranges compared with men. Adherence to recovery and rehabilitation from cardiac surgery is challenging for women. Solutions should focus on increased family support, and use of group exercise and activities.