Technical feasibility, safety, and clinical outcome of stenting of unprotected left main coronary artery bifurcation narrowing

Treatment of patients with left main coronary artery disease

OPINION STATEMENT

Considering lesion priority and its clinical consequences, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been a treatment of choice for revascularization in patients with significant left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease, However, with remarkable advancements in techniques of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), supporting devices, and adjunctive pharmacologic therapy, PCI with stenting has emerged to be a less invasive and feasible revascularization treatment for these patients. The cumulative evidence suggests that the safety outcomes such as mortality or composite of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke are similar among PCI and CABG, with the only difference being the rate of repeat revascularization. Based on these data, the current guideline of revascularization of LMCA disease has adopted an increasing off-label experience with stenting and clinical studies and been updated to partly approve PCI as a viable alternative (in level of class IIb) in selected patients. The choice of PCI or CABG for unprotected LMCA disease depends on several clinical and anatomic features, ensuring crucial patient selection to be a cornerstone for achieving favorable long-term outcomes. In patients with very complex anatomic features and concomitant diffuse multivessel disease, CABG is preferred so as to avoid procedural and future thrombotic risks and to provide more complete revascularization. By contrast, in patients with relatively simple LMCA disease, such as ostial/shaft LMCA disease, isolated LMCA disease (with or without one or two-vessel involvement), and LMCA disease with low SYNTAX score, PCI is an alternative, and in some cases a preferred, strategy to reduce surgical risks (eg, stroke and in-hospital events following major surgery). For the future, ongoing large clinical trials might also boost interventional cardiologists to select PCI with stenting as an alternative revascularization strategy for unprotected LMCA disease. This evidence will most likely change the current clinical practice and guidelines of optimal revascularization strategy for unprotected LMCA disease.

Percutaneous coronary intervention of unprotected left main coronary artery disease as culprit lesion in patients with acute myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction due to a culprit lesion in an unprotected left main coronary artery.

METHODS

In this retrospective, 2-center, international observational study, 5,261 patients were admitted between February 2005 and December 2008 with acute myocardial infarction and treated with PCI; of these, 1,277 were ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and 3,984 non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. We identified 48 patients among this cohort who underwent emergency PCI to an unprotected left main coronary artery culprit lesion.

RESULTS

Mean age was 70 ± 12.5 years, and 45% of the patients presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or new left bundle branch block. Cardiogenic shock was present in 45%, and distal left main coronary artery disease was present in 71% of patients. Angiographic procedural success was achieved in 92% of patients. Overall in-hospital mortality was 21%, due in all cases to refractory, multiorgan failure. Twenty-five percent experienced major adverse cardiac events, defined as death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and target vessel revascularization. In patients presenting in cardiogenic shock, in-hospital mortality was 32%. At 1-year follow-up, in-hospital survivors had a mortality rate of 10.5%, whereas 18.4% experienced subsequent major adverse cardiac events. Long-term prognosis was excellent in hospital survivors with a 1-year survival rate of 89.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with acute myocardial infarction and thrombosis of the unprotected left main coronary artery are a high-risk subgroup with a substantial mortality, particularly if they present in cardiogenic shock. We demonstrate that in these patients, PCI is a feasible treatment option associated with reasonably good outcomes. Long-term prognosis is excellent in hospital survivors with an 89.5% survival rate at 1 year.

Comparison of bypass surgery with drug-eluting stents in diabetic patients with left main coronary stenosis

PURPOSE

Several studies have compared the effects of coronary stenting and coronary- artery bypass grafting (CABG) on left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. However, there are limited data on the long-term outcomes of these two interventions in diabetic patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated 56 patients with LMCA stenosis who underwent drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation and 116 patients who underwent CABG in a single hospital in China between January 2004 and December 2006. We compared long-term major adverse cardiac events (death; a "serious outcome" composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; and target-vessel revascularization).

RESULTS

In-hospital (30-day) mortality was 0% for the DES group and 3.4% for the CABG group (p=0.31). There was no difference between the two groups in terms of risk of death [hazard ratio for stenting group, 0.49; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.13-1.63; p=0.55] or risk of serious outcome (hazard ratio for DES group, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.39-1.45; p=0.47). The target-vessel revascularization rate was higher in the DES group than in the CABG group (hazard ratio, 3.67; 95% CI, 1.24-11.06; p=0.018).

CONCLUSION

In this cohort of diabetic patients with LMCA stenosis, there was no difference in composite endpoints between patients receiving DESs and those undergoing CABG. However, stenting was associated with higher rates of target-vessel revascularization than CABG. DES implantation in diabetic patients with LMCA disease was found to be at least as safe as CABG.

Revascularization for unprotected left main coronary artery disease: an evolution in clinical decision making

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been considered the standard therapy for unprotected (nonrevascularized) left main coronary disease (ULM). However, increasing experience with ULM percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has resulted in high procedural success and favorable early and late clinical outcomes. In particular, reduction in clinical restenosis with drug-eluting stents, evolution of procedural technique, and demonstration of favorable outcomes from comparative trials with CABG have promoted consideration of PCI as an alternative revascularization strategy in selected patients with ULM disease. This review summarizes the results from comparative studies examining PCI versus CABG for ULM disease, discusses changing indications for ULM PCI and identifies outstanding issues that must be considered before further advancing treatment recommendations.

Complexity of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease and long-term outcomes in patients with unprotected left main disease treated with drug-eluting stents or coronary artery bypass grafting

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare treatment effects of drug-eluting stents (DES) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease according to the complexity of atherosclerotic disease burden.

BACKGROUND

Limited information is available on the relationships between the extent of coronary atherosclerosis and very long-term outcomes of surgical or percutaneous LMCA revascularization.

METHODS

A total of 1,146 patients with unprotected LMCA disease who received DES (n = 645) or underwent CABG (n = 501) were evaluated. The extent of atherosclerotic disease burden was measured using the SYNTAX (Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score; a low-risk score was defined as ≤ 22, an intermediate-risk score as 23 to 32, and a high-risk score as ≥ 33.

RESULTS

After multivariate adjustment with the inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting method, the 5-year risks for death (6.1% for DES vs. 16.2% for CABG; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21 to 1.28; p = 0.15) and the composite of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or stroke (6.4% vs. 16.2%; HR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.22 to 1.34; p = 0.18) favored DES in patients with low-risk SYNTAX scores; in contrast, the 5-year risks for death (26.9% vs. 17.8%; HR: 1.46; 95% CI: 0.92 to 2.30; p = 0.11) and the composite outcome (27.6% vs. 19.5%; HR: 1.36; 95% CI: 0.87 to 2.12; p = 0.18) favored CABG in patients with high-risk SYNTAX scores (interaction p = 0.047 for death, interaction p = 0.08 for composite outcome). Patients undergoing CABG consistently had lower rates of target vessel revascularization.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the complexity of concomitant coronary disease, there were differential treatment effects on long-term mortality in patients with unprotected LMCA disease who received DES or underwent CABG.

Long-term (4-year) outcomes and predictors of adverse cardiac events after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation in unprotected left main coronary artery

The long-term safety and efficiency of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) treatment in unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) have not yet been ascertained.From 2003 to 2006, 126 consecutive patients with de novo lesions in ULMCA who underwent SES were retrospectively analyzed in a single center in China. During 4-year follow-up, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE)-free survival was 74.6%. Cardiac death occurred in 5 (4.0%), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) and target vessel revascularization (TVR) occurred in 15 (11.9%) and 24 (19.0%) patients, respectively. One (0.8%) experienced probable stent thrombosis while 1 (0.8%) presented possible stent thrombosis. Impaired LVEF (< 40%) and high surgical risk (Euro score > 6) were the independent predictors of MACEs.PCI with SES for de novo lesions in ULMCA is feasible with a low procedural risk. However, SES was associated with a relatively higher rate of TLR and TVR. Impaired LVEF and high surgical risk were important predictors of MACEs.

Comparison of single- versus two-stent techniques in treatment of unprotected left main coronary bifurcation disease

BACKGROUND

This study sought to compare 3-year outcomes of single- versus two-stent techniques in patients with distal unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease treated with drug-eluting stents (DES).

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 392 patients with distal unprotected LMCA disease who underwent DES implantation with single- (n = 234) or two- (n = 158) stent techniques were evaluated. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR). The two-stent group was more likely to have extensive coronary artery stenosis. After adjustment with weighted Cox model using the inverse probability of treatment weighting, the 3-year risk of death was similar in the single- and two-stent groups (hazard ratio [HR], 0.77, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-2.13, P = 0.62). However, the 3-year risks of MI (HR, 0.38, 95% CI, 0.19-0.78, P = 0.008), TLR (HR, 0.16, 95% CI, 0.05-0.57, P = 0.005), and MACE (HR, 0.89, 95% CI, 0.22-0.67, P = 0.0007) were significantly lower in the single-stent group.

CONCLUSION

Compared with the two-stent technique, the single-stent technique showed more favorable long-term clinical outcomes in patients with distal unprotected LMCA disease who received DES

Major predictors of long-term clinical outcomes after coronary revascularization in patients with unprotected left main coronary disease: analysis from the MAIN-COMPARE study

BACKGROUND

The clinical characteristics that identify high-risk subsets of patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) have not been well established.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Between January 2000 and June 2006, 2240 patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease underwent PCI (n=1102) or CABG (n=1138). Twenty-six preprocedural parameters were evaluated by univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis to identify independent predictors of all-cause mortality and target-vessel revascularization. Interaction tests were performed to compare heterogeneities of effects of preprocedural parameters depending on the revascularization methods. During follow-up (median of 3.1 years), 187 patients died (78 PCI and 109 CABG) and 149 patients had target-vessel revascularization (121 PCI and 28 CABG). EuroSCORE > or =6 was an independent predictor of death in both groups. Additional independent predictors were chronic renal failure and previous congestive heart failure in the PCI group and age > or =75 years, atrial fibrillation, right coronary artery disease, and left main distal bifurcation disease in the CABG group. Interaction analysis showed no heterogeneities of the effects of variables depending on the revascularization methods. Independent predictors of target-vessel revascularization were acute coronary syndrome and left main distal bifurcation disease in the PCI group and history of coronary intervention in the CABG group. The interaction between previous PCI and treatment remained after adjustment for all independent predictors of target-vessel revascularization (interaction P=0.0345).

CONCLUSIONS

Several clinical characteristics were identified as important preprocedural predictors of long-term adverse outcomes after percutaneous or surgical revascularization in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease.

Comparison of long-term (4-year) outcomes of patients with unprotected left main coronary artery narrowing treated with drug-eluting stents versus coronary-artery bypass grafting

Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DES) may achieve midterm outcomes comparable to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for unprotected left main coronary artery disease, but few real-world, long-term studies have been reported. In this study, 376 patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease who underwent DES implantation (n = 131) or CABG (n = 245) were evaluated, and outcomes were compared using propensity analyses to adjust for baseline differences. Overall, 367 patients (98%) had complete clinical follow-up for a median of 4.0 years (interquartile range 3.2 to 4.7). Although the overall sample size was limited, there was a trend toward lower mortality with DES versus CABG in unadjusted (hazard ratio [HR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20 to 1.22, p = 0.13), multivariate-adjusted (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.09, p = 0.07), and propensity score-adjusted (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.03, p = 0.06) analyses. Treatment with DES was associated with a higher rate of target-vessel revascularization (TVR; 18% vs 9%, p = 0.02). However, ischemic TVR was not significantly different between the 2 groups (25% vs 39%, p = 0.15) in patients who received angiographic follow-up. No differences were detected in the occurrence of composite major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events between DES and CABG (27% vs 22%, p = 0.42). In conclusion, during 4-year follow-up, overall composite major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were similar after DES and CABG treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery disease, with a trend toward lower mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention with DES. DES were associated with a higher rate of TVR compared to CABG, but ischemic TVR was not significantly different between the 2 groups.

Long-term follow-up after nonurgent percutaneous coronary intervention in unprotected left main coronary arteries

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the long-term outcomes of the selected patients by the local Heart Team to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis and to compare patients considered at low surgical risk versus at high surgical risk for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

BACKGROUND

CABG is recommended in patients with ULMCA stenosis according to the AHA/ACC and ESC guidelines, and there are limited data on the long-term outcomes in patients selected by the local Heart Team to undergo PCI.

METHODS

Between 1996 and 2007, 227 patients underwent PCI for ULMCA stenosis based on decision of the local Heart Team and patient's and/or physician's preference. All patients were contacted at 1 year and in November 2008.

RESULTS

Long-term follow-up was up to 8 years with a mean of 3.9 +/- 2.6 years. Overall, the Kaplan-Meier estimate of the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR) was 14.8% at 1 year, 18.3% at 3 years, and 20.9% at 5 years with no events occurring thereafter. Patients considered at low surgical risk for CABG had a significantly lower incidence of cardiac death or MI compared to patients considered at high surgical risk at 8 years (1.4 vs. 16.8%; 1.4 vs. 14.8%, respectively); however, no significant difference was observed for cardiac death, MI, or TLR (18.6 vs. 24.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

PCI of ULMCA stenosis in patients selected by the Heart Team resulted in good long-term clinical outcomes with most events occurring within the 1st year. Patients considered at low surgical risk for CABG have a significantly better long-term survival than patients at high risk for surgery.

Long-term clinical outcomes of sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stents for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease: analysis of the MAIN-COMPARE (revascularization for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: comparison of percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus surgical revascularization) registry

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term clinical outcomes after implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) among patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease.

BACKGROUND

There have been few comparisons of long-term outcomes among currently available drug-eluting stents (DES) for the treatment of LMCA disease.

METHODS

A total of 858 consecutive patients with unprotected LMCA stenosis were treated with SES (n = 669) or PES (n = 189) between May 2003 and June 2006. Primary outcome was the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR).

RESULTS

Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar in the 2 groups. During 3 years of follow-up, the adjusted risk of primary composite outcome was similar among the groups (SES vs. PES: 25.8% vs. 25.7%, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64 to 1.41, p = 0.79). The 2 groups also showed a comparable adjusted rate of each component of outcome: death (9.1% vs. 11.0%, HR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.47 to 1.80, p = 0.82), MI (8.1% vs. 8.0%, HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.43 to 1.48, p = 0.47), and TVR (12.1% vs. 10.6%, HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.53 to 2.29, p = 0.81). The 3-year rates of definite or probable stent thrombosis were 0.6% in the SES group and 1.6% in the PES group (adjusted p = 0.18).

CONCLUSIONS

In consecutive patients with unprotected LMCA disease undergoing DES implantation, SES and PES showed similar long-term clinical outcomes in terms of death, MI, repeat revascularization, and stent thrombosis.

Clinical and angiographic outcome of stenting of unprotected left main coronary artery bifurcation narrowing

PURPOSE

Improvements in techniques and equipments may result in the wider applicability of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis. This report is a prospective study focused on the feasibility, effectiveness and long-term results of stenting for treatment of ULMCA bifurcation lesions.

METHODS

From November 2002 to October 2003, 57 consecutive patients were stented with bare metal stents and the technique of kissing balloon followed by T-provisional stenting was applied for ostial left anterior descending, left circumflex or distal left main coronary lesion.

RESULTS

Mean age was 69.5+/-10.7 years. Acute coronary syndrome occurred in 68.4% of patients with a majority of two or three vessel disease (45.10% and 35.30% respectively). GpIIbIIIa inhibitors were used in only 5.8% of cases. Angiographic success was obtained in 100% of patients. Hospital stay was 7.03+/-2.26 days without major adverse cardiac events. At eight months follow-up, cardiac death was 1.7%, non-fatal myocardial infarction 5.1% and target vessel revascularisation 22.8% including CABG 15.7% and repeated PCI 10.5% with an angiographic restenosis rate of 29.8%.

CONCLUSION

In the setting of coronary stenting of the ULMCA stenosis, the use of bare metal stents can no longer be considered contemporary technique and another strategy such as coated stent may be needed.

Impact of Bifurcation Technique on 2-Year Clinical Outcomes in 773 Patients With Distal Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis Treated With Drug-Eluting Stents

Background— Distal unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis represents a technical challenge for interventional cardiologists. In this study, we compared 2-year clinical outcomes of different stenting strategies in patients with distal ULMCA stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents.

Methods and Results— The survey promoted by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology on ULMCA stenosis was an observational study on patients with ULMCA stenosis treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. In this study, we selected patients with distal ULMCA stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents. Seven hundred seventy-three patients were eligible for this study: 456 were treated with 1 stent (group 1) and 317 with 2 stents (group 2). The primary end point of the study was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as the occurrence of mortality, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. During a 2-year follow-up, risk-adjusted survival free from MACE was significantly higher in patients in group 1 than in patients in group 2. The propensity-adjusted hazard ratio for the risk of 2-year MACE in patients in group 1 versus group 2 was 0.53 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.76). The propensity-adjusted hazard ratio for the risk of 2-year cardiac mortality and myocardial infarction in patients in group 1 versus group 2 was 0.38 (95% CI, 0.17 to 0.85).

Conclusions— Compared with the 2-stent technique, the 1-stent technique is associated with a better 2-year MACE-free survival. The stenting strategy is a prognostic factor that should be taken into account when deciding the optimal revascularization treatment.

Stents versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for left main coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Several studies have compared the treatment effects of coronary stenting and coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG). However, there are limited data regarding the long-term outcomes of these two interventions for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease.

METHODS

We evaluated 1102 patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease who underwent stent implantation and 1138 patients who underwent CABG in Korea between January 2000 and June 2006. We compared adverse outcomes (death; a composite outcome of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or stroke; and target-vessel revascularization) with the use of propensity-score matching in the overall cohort and in separate subgroups according to type of stent.

RESULTS

In the overall matched cohort, there was no significant difference between the stenting and CABG groups in the risk of death (hazard ratio for the stenting group, 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.80) or the risk of the composite outcome (hazard ratio for the stenting group, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.62). The rates of target-vessel revascularization were significantly higher in the group that received stents than in the group that underwent CABG (hazard ratio, 4.76; 95% CI, 2.80 to 8.11). Comparisons of the group that received bare-metal stents with the group that underwent CABG and of the group that received drug-eluting stents with the group that underwent CABG produced similar results, although there was a trend toward higher rates of death and the composite end point in the group that received drug-eluting stents.

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease, we found no significant difference in rates of death or of the composite end point of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or stroke between patients receiving stents and those undergoing CABG. However, stenting, even with drug-eluting stents, was associated with higher rates of target-vessel revascularization than was CABG.

Immediate and long-term outcomes of drug-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery disease: comparison with bare-metal stent implantation

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease remain to be established in different clinical settings.

METHODS

Elective DES implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis was performed in 220 patients at the Fu Wai Hospital, China, from April 2003 to February 2006. Data derived from the latter group were compared with those derived from 224 patients treated with bare-metal stents (BMSs) before March 2003 in a Chinese registry of unprotected LMCA stenting.

RESULTS

Compared with the historical BMS control group, the DES group had more multivessel disease and underwent more bifurcation stenting. The inhospital major adverse cardiac events were significantly higher in the DES than in the BMS recipients (4.1% vs 0.9%, P = .030) because of more complex lesions and procedures in the DES group. During the 15-month mean follow-up period, cumulative cardiac death (0.5% vs 4.9%, P = .004), target-vessel revascularization (5.9% vs 11.6%, P = .034), and major adverse cardiac event (9.5% vs 16.5%, P = .029) rates were significantly lower in the DES than in the BMS group. There was no significant difference in clinical efficacy between sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents. Angiographic follow-up was performed in 46.4% of DES and 45.7% of BMS recipients, respectively; and the binary restenosis rate was significantly lower in the DES versus the BMS control group (16.7% vs 31.4%, P = .014).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this comparison with a historical control, DES implantation for unprotected LMCA appears safe in selected patients and might be more effective in preventing major adverse cardiac events compared with BMS implantation over a mean follow-up period of 15 months.

Safety and effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for in-stent restenosis of the unprotected left main coronary artery

The present study examined the alternative treatment of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation for in-stent restenosis (ISR) of the unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA). Twelve patients underwent SES deployment for bare-metal ISR in the LMCA. ISR were 24+/-11 mm in length and located at the ostial (n=1) and distal (n=11) portion of LMCA. Bifurcation lesions were treated with one of three techniques: the stent crossing the left circumflex artery (n=7), kissing stenting (n=2) or the Crush technique (n=2). All procedures were performed using intravascular ultrasound guidance. Periprocedural CK-MB elevation > or = 3 times normal occurred in 2 patients. There were no cases of significant narrowing in the left circumflex artery after the procedure. At the one-year follow-up, one patient died and there were no incidents of myocardial infarction or target lesion revascularization. The present study suggests that SES implantation may be a feasible therapeutic option for treating ISR in unprotected LMCA.

Results of percutaneous coronary intervention of the unprotected left main coronary artery in 143 patients and comparison of 30-day mortality to results of coronary artery bypass grafting

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) is controversial. In 143 patients who underwent PCI of the unprotected LMCA, 30-day mortality was compared with predicted cumulative risk-adjusted perioperative surgical mortality based on logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation. One-year clinical follow-up was completed in all patients. The overall major adverse cardiac event rate at 1 year was 34.3%, reflecting the high-risk profile of the patient population. Twelve patients (8%) experienced an acute myocardial infarction and 16 (11%) underwent target lesion revascularization. In 31 patients (22%) who died during the first year, median logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation was 30%. Calculated RRs showed significantly lower 30-day mortality using PCI compared with predicted surgical mortality (RR 0.54, 95% confidence interval 0.31 to 0.86). Angiographic follow-up in 90 of the 118 patients alive at 6 months showed binary restenosis of 6% in patients treated with drug-eluting stents versus 29% in patients receiving bare-metal stents (p < or =0.01). In conclusion, PCI for unprotected LMCA disease was associated with acceptable short- and medium-term outcomes in patients at low to intermediate risk of bypass surgery. Mortality remains high in very high-risk patients unsuitable for surgery. However, in selected indications, PCI of the LMCA can offer an alternative to surgery, especially when using drug-eluting stents.

Left main coronary artery stenosis: state-of-the-art

Patients with stenosis of the left main coronary artery present difficult challenges. The risks associated with this lesion have been known since the early days of angiography when patients were found to have increased mortality during follow-up. This information led to the general guidelines that surgical revascularization should be considered the treatment of choice in patients with significant left main coronary artery stenosis. Current advances in invasive cardiology have brought important information to the field. Intravascular ultrasound is now used routinely to evaluate angiographically indeterminate lesions with criteria now set forward as to what constitutes an indication for revascularization. Stents have even further dramatically changed the landscape. There are substantial issues, however, that need to addressed. These include the following: (1) the effect of specific lesion location on outcome - it is known that patients with distal bifurcation left main disease have worse outcome; (2) the potential for subacute thrombosis of the left main coronary artery; (3) the impact of left ventricular function and patient comorbidities irrespective of the degree and location of left main coronary artery stenosis; and (4) the risk-benefit ratio of stenting versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery. These issues are currently being addressed in two seminally important trials including the SYNTAX trial, which randomizes patients with left main and/or three-vessel disease to either coronary artery bypass graft surgery or a TAXUS drug-eluting stent. This trial is in the final stages of patient recruitment and will have important implications for the field. The other trial is the COMBAT trial, which is focused exclusively on left main coronary artery stenosis and randomizes patients with left main coronary artery disease either to a Sirolimus-eluting stent (Cypher, Johnson and Johnson Cordis, USA) or to coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The field of left main coronary artery disease continues to expand in terms of the evidence available for optimal patient evaluation and selection of treatment modalities.

Stenting of Unprotected Distal Left Main Coronary Artery Bifurcation Stenoses Using Modified Crush Technique with Double Kissing Balloon Inflation (Sleeve Technique): Immediate Procedure Result and Early Clinical Outcome

BACKGROUND

Sleeve technique is a modified version of the crush technique. It is specifically designed to increase the success rate of final kissing balloon inflation, which used to be a major limitation of the latter.

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to look at the feasibility, safety, and early clinical outcome of sleeve technique in stenting of unprotected distal left main coronary artery (LMCA) bifurcation stenoses.

METHODS

From August 2005 to April 2006, 12 consecutive patients with symptomatic distal LMCA bifurcation stenoses of diameter narrowing > or =50%, who refused coronary artery bypass graft surgery, were treated with two-stent strategy using the sleeve technique.

RESULTS

Eleven patients (91.7%) were male, with a mean age of 64.4 +/- 9.3 years. Intravenous abciximab was given to 10 patients (83.3%). The baseline reference vessel diameters of the main vessel and side branch were 3.32 +/- 0.44 and 3.00 +/- 0.58 mm, respectively. After intervention, the minimal luminal diameter was increased from 0.99 +/- 0.46 to 3.26 +/- 0.28 mm and 1.43 +/- 0.71 to 2.93 +/- 0.45 mm in the main vessel and side branch, respectively. The intervention procedure was successful in all patients with 100% final kissing balloon inflation rate. The average procedure time was 58.6 +/- 20.5 minutes. Two patients had a small non-Q myocardial infarction postprocedure. The resultant major adverse cardiac event rate was 16.7% at 30 days after the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Sleeve technique is a safe and feasible approach in the stenting of distal LMCA bifurcation stenoses.

Comparison of simple and complex stenting techniques in the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery bifurcation stenosis

We assessed the safety and feasibility of various stenting techniques using the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) bifurcation stenoses. One hundred sixteen patients with unprotected LMCA bifurcation stenoses underwent SES implantation. A simple stenting technique (simple group, n = 67) across the left circumflex artery (LCx) and a complex technique (complex group) comprising "kissing" stenting (n = 24) or a "crush" (n = 25) technique were used. Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar for the 2 groups, except for more multivessel involvement and narrower LCxs in the complex group. The procedural success rate was 100%. Angiographic restenosis rate at 6 months was lower in the simple group (5.3%) than in the complex group (24.4%, p = 0.024). In the complex group, restenosis rates were similar for the kissing (25.0%) and crush (23.8%) techniques (p = 1.0). There were no incidents of death or myocardial infarction during follow-up (median 18.6 months). Target lesion revascularization was performed in 6 patients only in the complex group (0% vs 12.2%, p = 0.005). At 18 months, survival rates without target lesion revascularization were 100 +/- 0% in the simple group and 85.7 +/- 5.6% in the complex group (p = 0.004). In conclusion, SES implantation for unprotected LMCA bifurcation stenoses appears to be safe and effective. Compared with the complex stenting technique, the simple technique was technically easier and appeared to be more effective in improving long-term outcomes in patients with normal LCxs.

Comparison of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Drug-Eluting Stents for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the clinical outcomes of consecutive, selected patients treated with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease.

BACKGROUND

Although recent data suggest that PCI with DES provides better clinical outcomes compared to bare-metal stenting for ULMCA disease, there is a paucity of data comparing PCI with DES to CABG.

METHODS

Since April 2003, when DES first became available at our institution, 123 patients underwent CABG, and 50 patients underwent PCI with DES for ULMCA disease.

RESULTS

High-risk patients (Parsonnet score >15) comprised 46% of the CABG group and 64% of the PCI group (p = 0.04). The 30-day major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rate for CABG and PCI was 17% and 2% (p < 0.01), respectively. The mean follow-up was 6.7 +/- 6.2 months in the CABG group and 5.6 +/- 3.9 months in the PCI group (p = 0.26). The estimated MACCE-free survival at six months and one year was 83% and 75% in the CABG group versus 89% and 83% in the PCI group (p = 0.20). By multivariable Cox regression, Parsonnet score, diabetes, and CABG were independent predictors of MACCE.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a higher percentage of high-risk patients, PCI with DES for ULMCA disease was not associated with an increase in immediate or medium-term complications compared with CABG. Our data suggest that a randomized comparison between the two revascularization strategies for ULMCA may be warranted.

Crushing the circumflex stent arm in a case of proximal peristent restenosis after kissing stent for the distal left main disease

We present a case of proximal peristent restenosis after kissing stenting in the distal left main lesion. The patient was treated by crushing the proximal portion of the circumflex stent after passing through the stent arm in the left anterior descending.

Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for chronic total occlusion of the left main coronary artery

Chronic total occlusion of the left main coronary artery (LMCA) is rare. Recently, percutaneous coronary intervention has been increasingly applied to unprotected LMCA lesions. We describe a patient with chronic total occlusion of the LMCA who was successfully treated with bifurcation stenting with sirolimus-eluting stents.

Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to compare the clinical and angiographic outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and bare metal stent (BMS) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis.

BACKGROUND

The safety and effectiveness of SES implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis have not been ascertained.

METHODS

Elective SES implantation for de novo unprotected LMCA stenosis was performed in 102 consecutive patients with preserved left ventricular function from March 2003 to March 2004. Data from this group were compared to those from 121 patients treated with BMS during the preceding two years.

RESULTS

Compared to the BMS group, the SES group received more direct stenting, had fewer debulking atherectomies, had a greater number of stents, had more segments stented, and underwent more bifurcation stenting. The procedural success rate was 100% for both groups. There were no incidents of death, stent thrombosis, Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI), or emergent bypass surgery during hospitalization in either group. Despite less acute gain (2.06 +/- 0.56 mm vs. 2.73 +/- 0.73 mm, p < 0.001) in the SES group, SES patients showed a lower late lumen loss (0.05 +/- 0.57 mm vs. 1.27 +/- 0.90 mm, p < 0.001) and a lower six-month angiographic restenosis rate (7.0% vs. 30.3%, p < 0.001) versus the BMS group. At 12 months, the rate of freedom from death, MI, and target lesion revascularization was 98.0 +/- 1.4% in the SES group and 81.4 +/- 3.7% in the BMS group (p = 0.0003).

CONCLUSIONS

Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis appears safe with regard to acute and midterm complications and is more effective in preventing restenosis compared to BMS implantation.

Technique of left main stenting is dependent on lesion location and distal branch protection

The purpose of this study was to review our experience with left main stenting and evaluate initial results with drug-eluting stents (DESs). Drug-eluting stents delivered with contemporary techniques could change the traditional surgical approach to patients with significant left main disease. One hundred sixty-one patients underwent left main stenting (100 bare metal, 61 drug-eluting) after being excluded from surgery. In group A, disease was confined to the ostium or main stem; in group B, disease involved the bifurcation. Patients were classified as either unprotected (U) or protected (P) depending on the presence of a patent bypass graft. Study endpoints were any major adverse cardiac event (MACE). In-hospital MACE was 6% with no deaths; 74% of patients in group A underwent direct stenting, whereas 89% of the patients in group B had predilatation performed prior to stent implantation. A total of 98% of patients in BU had kissing balloon inflations after stent deployment; provisional side-branch stenting was required in one patient. V-stenting was performed in 13% of patients in group BU. The 1-year mortality in the bare metal stent group was 9% with the majority of deaths in group BU. There was one noncardiac death in the DES group at 6 months and five patients (8.2%) underwent target vessel revascularization for restenosis. Event-free survival at 6 months in group BU treated with DESs was 87%. Significant left main disease presents a spectrum of angiographic abnormalities and different interventional techniques are required depending on lesion location and distal protection. Although in-hospital complications with left main stenting were low in this single-center study, follow-up events were common in patients treated with bare metal stents. A randomized multicenter trial will be required to determine whether drug-eluting stents will improve survival in patients with left main disease.

Kissing sirolimus-eluting stents for the treatment of left main coronary artery stenosis

We present a case of kissing drug-eluting stent deployment in the left main coronary artery in a 43-year-old male with failed previous bypass grafting. We discuss the technique used for stent deployment and the rationale for using this technique in the drug-eluting stent era.

Elective sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for left main coronary artery disease: Six-month angiographic follow-up and 1-year clinical outcome

The effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation in patients treated electively for left main (LM) stenoses has not been yet ascertained. The present study reports on the clinical and angiographic outcome of 16 consecutive patients treated electively for de novo stenoses in the LM. The impact of SES implantation on major adverse cardiac events was evaluated. Mean age was 65 +/- 11 years. Unprotected LM was present in nine (56%), and eight patients (50%) received stents extending into both the left anterior descending and circumflex arteries for stenoses of the distal left main bifurcation. In-house mortality and reintervention rate was zero. One patient developed a non-Q-wave myocardial infarction related to the index procedure. At 1-year clinical follow-up, there were no deaths or further myocardial infarctions; one (6%) patient required target lesion revascularization. A total of 12 patients (75%) underwent 6-month angiographic follow-up with a late lumen loss of 0.04 +/- 0.65 mm and one focal restenosis (8% of patients). Elective SES implantation for LM disease was associated with zero mortality and a very low incidence of additional major adverse events at 1 year.

Impact of different anatomical patterns of left main coronary stenting on long-term survival

There are no significant differences in long-term and event-free survival in patients who undergo stent implantation in different anatomic locations of the left main coronary artery. Predictors of long-term survival are age <65 years, normal left ventricular ejection fraction, and absence of an intra-aortic balloon pump.