New-generation stents compared with coronary bypass surgery for unprotected left main disease: A word of caution

Revascularisation strategies in patients with significant left main coronary disease during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

There are limited data on the impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on left main (LM) coronary revascularisation activity, choice of revascularisation strategy, and post‐procedural outcomes.

Methods

All patients with LM disease (≥50% stenosis) undergoing coronary revascularisation in England between January 1, 2017 and August 19, 2020 were included (n = 22,235), stratified by time‐period (pre‐COVID: 01/01/2017–29/2/2020; COVID: 1/3/2020–19/8/2020) and revascularisation strategy (percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Logistic regression models were performed to examine odds ratio (OR) of 1) receipt of CABG (vs. PCI) and 2) in‐hospital and 30‐day postprocedural mortality, in the COVID‐19 period (vs. pre‐COVID).

Results

There was a decline of 1,354 LM revascularisation procedures between March 1, 2020 and July 31, 2020 compared with previous years' (2017–2019) averages (−48.8%). An increased utilization of PCI over CABG was observed in the COVID period (receipt of CABG vs. PCI: OR 0.46 [0.39, 0.53] compared with 2017), consistent across all age groups. No difference in adjusted in‐hospital or 30‐day mortality was observed between pre‐COVID and COVID periods for both PCI (odds ratio (OR): 0.72 [0.51. 1.02] and 0.83 [0.62, 1.11], respectively) and CABG (OR 0.98 [0.45, 2.14] and 1.51 [0.77, 2.98], respectively) groups.

Conclusion

LM revascularisation activity has significantly declined during the COVID period, with a shift towards PCI as the preferred strategy. Postprocedural mortality within each revascularisation group was similar in the pre‐COVID and COVID periods, reflecting maintenance in quality of outcomes during the pandemic. Future measures are required to safely restore LM revascularisation activity to pre‐COVID levels.

Examining Coronary Revascularization Practice Patterns for Diabetics: Perceived Barriers, Facilitators, and Implications for Knowledge Translation

BACKGROUND

The FREEDOM trial provided robust evidence that coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was superior to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary revascularization in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and multivessel coronary artery disease (MV-CAD). The present study examined practice pattern changes and perceived barriers and facilitators to implementing FREEDOM trial evidence in British Columbia (BC).

METHODS

Using a population-based database of cardiac procedures in BC, PCI:CABG ratios from 2007-2014 were compared before and after publication of the FREEDOM trial in the 4 tertiary cardiac centres that provided both CABG and PCI. Surveys of barriers and facilitators to implementation of evidence in practice were completed by 57 health care providers (HCPs) attending educational outreach sessions conducted in 2016-17 at 5 tertiary cardiac centres in BC.

RESULTS

The overall PCI:CABG ratio declined from 1.59 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.48-1.70, range 1.16-1.86) before publication to 0.88 (95% CI 0.75-1.01, range 0.56-0.82) after publication (P < 0.01). This decline from before to after publication was significant in 3 centres, but not in the fourth centre (from 1.62 to 1.49; P = 0.61). Barriers were identified at the levels of evidence (applicability, credibility), HCP (awareness/knowledge, practice behaviours), patient (knowledge/misconceptions, preferences), and systems (siloing of care, financial disincentives, resource limitations, geography). Facilitators were additional studies/guidelines, education/dissemination, shared decision making, a heart team approach, changes to remuneration models, and increased resources.

CONCLUSIONS

Following publication of the FREEDOM trial, the proportion of patients with DM and MV-CAD undergoing CABG increased in BC; however, practice patterns varied across cardiac centres. HCPs attributed these practice variations to multilevel barriers and facilitators. Future knowledge translation strategies should be multifaceted and tailored to identified determinants.

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass surgery for unprotected left main disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was aimed at comparing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary disease.

Methods

All RCTs randomizing patients to any type of PCI with stents vs. CABG for left main disease (LMD) were included. Primary outcome was a composite of follow-up death/myocardial infarction/stroke/repeat revascularization. Secondary outcomes were peri-procedural mortality and the individual components of the primary outcome. Incidence rate ratio (IRR) or odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using a generic inverse variance method with random effects model. Subgroup analyses were done based on: (I) type of PCI [bare metal stents (BMS) vs. drug-eluting stents (DES)] and; (II) mean SYNTAX score tertiles. Leave one-out analysis and meta-regression were performed.

Results

Six trials were included (4,700 patients; 2,349 PCI and 2,351 CABG). Follow-up ranged from 2.33 to 5 years. PCI was associated with higher risk of follow-up death/myocardial infarction/stroke/repeat revascularization (IRR =1.328, 95% CI, 1.114-1.582, P=0.002) and of repeated revascularization (IRR =1.754, 95% CI, 1.470-2.093, P<0.001). The risk of peri-procedural mortality (OR =0.866, 95% CI, 0.460-1.628, P=0.654), follow-up mortality (IRR =0.947, 95% CI, 0.711-1.262, P=0.712), myocardial infarction (IRR =1.342, 95% CI, 0.827-2.179, P=0.234) and stroke (IRR =0.800, 95% CI, 0.374-1.710, P=0.565) were similar between groups. No differences were found between DES and BMS subgroups. The risk of follow-up death/myocardial infarction/stroke/repeat revascularization with PCI was higher in all SYNTAX tertiles, with a progressive increase from the 1^st to the 3^rd tertile. At meta-regression, higher mean SYNTAX score was associated with higher risk for the primary outcome in the PCI group (beta =0.02, P=0.05), whereas no association was found with female gender, mean age, or diabetes.

Conclusions

CABG remains the therapy of choice for the treatment of unprotected LMD, especially for patients with a high SYNTAX score.