Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Optimal Medical Treatment for Chronic Total Occlusion: A Comprehensive Meta-analysis

Three-year outcomes of A Randomized Multicentre Trial Comparing Revascularization and Optimal Medical Therapy for Chronic Total Coronary Occlusions (EuroCTO)

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic total coronary occlusions (CTO) improves clinical symptoms and quality of life. The longer-term safety of PCI compared to optimal medical therapy (OMT) remains uncertain.

AIMS

We sought to evaluate the long-term safety of PCI for CTO in a randomised trial as compared to OMT.

METHODS

A total of 396 patients with a symptomatic CTO were enrolled into a randomised, multicentre clinical trial comparing PCI and OMT. Half of the patients had a single CTO; the others had multivessel disease. Non-CTO lesions were treated prior to randomisation (2:1 ratio). During follow-up, crossover from OMT to PCI occurred in 7.3% (1 year) and 17.5% (3 years) of patients.

RESULTS

At 3 years, the incidence of cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction was not significantly different between the groups (OMT 3.7% vs PCI 6.2%; p=0.29). By per-protocol analysis, the difference remained non-significant (OMT 5.7% vs PCI 4.7%; p=0.67). Overall, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were more frequent with OMT (OMT 21.2% vs PCI 11.2%), largely because of ischaemia-driven revascularisation. The rates of stroke or hospitalisation for bleeding were not different between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

At 3 years there was no difference in the rate of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction between PCI or OMT among patients with a remaining single coronary CTO. The MACE rate was higher in the OMT group due largely to ischaemia-driven revascularisation. CTO PCI appears to be a safe option for patients with a single remaining significant coronary CTO. CinicalTrials.gov: NCT01760083.

Revascularization of chronic total occlusion coronary artery and cardiac regeneration

Coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) contributes to the progression of heart failure in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Randomized controlled trials demonstrated that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for CTO significantly improves angina symptoms and quality of life but fails to reduce clinical events compared with optimal medical therapy. Even so, intervening physicians strongly support CTO-PCI. Cardiac regeneration therapy after CTO-PCI should be a promising approach to improving the prognosis of ischemic cardiomyopathy. However, the relationship between CTO revascularization and cardiac regeneration has rarely been studied, and experimental studies on cardiac regeneration usually employ rodent models with permanent ligation of the coronary artery rather than reopening of the occlusive artery. Limited early-stage clinical trials demonstrated that cell therapy for cardiac regeneration in ischemic cardiomyopathy reduces scar size, reverses cardiac remodeling, and promotes angiogenesis. This review focuses on the status quo of CTO-PCI in ischemic cardiomyopathy and the clinical prospect of cardiac regeneration in this setting.

Nicorandil Improves Left Ventricular Myocardial Strain in Patients With Coronary Chronic Total Occlusion

Background

Nicorandil is recommended as a second-line treatment for stable angina; however, randomized-controlled trials to evaluate the benefit of nicorandil for patients with chronic total occlusion (CTO) are lacking.

Objective

To determine whether nicorandil can improve left ventricular (LV) myocardial strain in patients with CTO.

Methods

Patients with CTO were included and randomized to the nicorandil group (n = 31) and the control group (n = 30). Nicorandil was given orally at 15 mg/day for 3 months in the nicorandil group. Three-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography and the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) survey were performed at baseline and at 3 months. The primary study endpoint was the LV global area strain (GAS) at 3 months.

Results

The nicorandil and the control groups were well-matched at baseline, including the mean GAS and SAQ scores. At 3 months, GAS in the nicorandil group was significantly higher than that in the control group (−23.7 ± 6.3% vs. −20.3 ± 5.6%, respectively; p = 0.033). There were no significant differences in LV global longitudinal strain, global circumferential strain, global radial strain, LV ejection fraction, LV end-diastolic volume, and LV end-systolic volume at 3 months between the two groups. At 3 months, the SAQ scores for angina stability, angina frequency, and treatment satisfaction in the nicorandil group were significantly higher than those in the control group.

Conclusion

Nicorandil treatment can improve GAS and angina symptoms in patients with CTO.

Clinical Trial Registration

www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT05087797.