Unprotected left main coronary artery stenting: immediate and medium-term outcomes of 140 elective procedures

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Present Status and Future Perspectives

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.

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Unprotected Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Large Single-Centre Experience

Aims

This study sought to report the 10-year clinical outcomes of patients who underwent unprotected left main (LM) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in a large centre.

Methods and Results

A total of 913 consecutive patients who underwent unprotected LM PCI from January 2004 to December 2008 at Fu Wai Hospital were retrospectively analysed; the mean age was 60.0 ± 10.9 years, females accounted for 22% of patients, diabetes was present in 27.7% of patients, and an LM bifurcation lesion occurred in 82.9% of patients. During the median follow-up of 9.7 years, major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) occurred in 25.6% (234) of patients, and the rates of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke were 14.9%, 11.0%, and 7.1%, respectively. Cardiac death occurred in only 7.9% of patients. The estimated event rate was 41.9% for death/myocardial infarction/any revascularization and 45.9% for death/MI/stroke/any revascularization. Definite/probable stent thrombosis occurred in 4.3% (39) of patients. According to the subgroup analysis, IVUS-guided PCI was associated with less long-term MACCEs. Further multivariate analysis identified that age and LVEF<40% were the only independent predictors for 10-year death. Age, LVEF<40%, creatinine clearance, and incomplete revascularization were independent predictors for death/MI, while a two-stent strategy, diabetes, a transradial approach, and the use of bare metal stents (BMSs) or first-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) were not.

Conclusions

Unprotected LM PCI in a large cohort of consecutive patients in a single large centre demonstrated favourable long-term outcomes up to 10 years even with the use of BMSs and first-generation of DESs.

Impact of unprotected left main percutaneous coronary intervention on long-term clinical outcomes: a large single-center study

BACKGROUND

With the advancements of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), it is not clear whether unprotected left main (ULM) coronary artery disease (CAD) remains an independent predictor of adverse outcomes after PCI therapy. We have therefore carried out a large cohort study to investigate the impact of ULM disease on 2-year clinical outcomes in Chinese patients undergoing contemporary PCI treatment.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From January 2013 to December 2013, 10 724 consecutive patients undergoing PCI were prospectively collected. Two-year clinical outcomes were compared for patients undergoing ULM PCI and non-ULM PCI. Among the 10 724 patients, 272 (2.5%) patients underwent ULM PCI. Overall, these patients had higher baseline clinical risks of CAD and more extensive CAD compared with non-ULM PCI patients. During the 2-year follow-up, patients who underwent ULM PCI experienced higher incidence of cardiac death (2.2 vs. 0.7%; log-rank P=0.002), myocardial infarction (7.0 vs. 1.9%; log-rank P<0.001), stroke (2.9 vs. 1.3%; log-rank P=0.02), and definite and probable stent thrombosis (3.3 vs. 0.5%; log-rank P<0.001), than patients who underwent non-ULM PCI. However, the rates of revascularization (7.4 vs. 8.7%; log-rank P=0.48), target vessel revascularization (5.5 vs. 5.0%; log-rank P=0.66), and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (15.1 vs. 12.0%; log-rank P=0.11) were not significantly different between the groups. When performing adjusted Cox regression after propensity score matching, ULM PCI was not an independent risk factor of any clinical events (all P>0.05).

CONCLUSION

In this large cohort of patients who underwent modern PCI, ULM PCI patients had higher baseline clinical risks and poorer prognosis during 2-year follow-up. However, after multivariate analysis, ULM PCI was not an independent risk factor of any clinical adverse events.

Bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting in patients with left main disease: a single-center experience

OBJECTIVE

We compared early and long-term outcomes between bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) grafting and single internal thoracic artery (SITA) grafting in patients with LM disease.

METHODS

We evaluated the outcomes of all patients with LM disease who underwent revascularization in our center during 1996-2011. Variables that were adjusted for in a multivariate analysis and in propensity matching included age, sex, comorbid diseases, repeat operation, the number of diseased vessels, other conduits used, the use of sequential grafting, the number of grafts constructed, and the operative era (1996-2000 vs. 2001-2011).

RESULTS

In total, 949 patients with LM disease underwent BITA grafting and 564 underwent SITA grafting during the study period. SITA patients were more often female and more likely to have comorbidities such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, ejection fraction <30%, recent myocardial infarction, diabetes, congestive heart failure, chronic renal failure, and peripheral vascular disease, and to have undergone an emergency operation. We found no statistically significant difference between the SITA and BITA groups in 30-day mortality (4.8% vs. 3.3%, P = 0.136), sternal wound infection (2.0% vs. 2.4%, P = 0.548), and stroke (3.2% vs. 4.4%, P = 0.234). BITA patients had improved long-term survival (70.1% vs. 52.0% p<0.001), median follow-up of 15 years. In multivariate analysis, after propensity score matching (477 matched pairs), this finding was not statistically significant (P = 0.135).

CONCLUSION

This study did not demonstrate a clear benefit of BITA grafts among patients with LM disease.

Percutaneous coronary intervention in left main disease: SYNTAX, PRECOMBAT, EXCEL and NOBLE-combined cardiology and cardiac surgery perspective

Although coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the standard choice of revascularization for significant left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for LMCA disease has been widely expanded with adoption of drug-eluting stents (DES). Several small- and moderate-sized trials of CABG and first-generation DES showed that PCI might be a good alternative for selected patients with LMCA disease. However, these early trials were relatively underpowered and comparative results of contemporary DES and CABG were clearly required. Subsequently, two large-sized trials comparing CABG and contemporary DES (EXCEL and NOBLE) were conducted, but these trials showed conflicting results with regards to the effects of PCI and CABG on clinical outcomes, which raises further uncertainty on the optimal revascularization for LMCA disease. This article serves to summarize the key findings of landmark clinical trials, to share our knowledge and experience and to express personal opinions on current controversies in the treatment of LMCA disease.

Prognosis of Percutaneous Intervention of a Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis Without the Use of Intravascular Imaging

Objectives

The aim of this study was to assess the prognosis in patients with left main coronary artery stenosis one year after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Methods

Our study included 40 patients who underwent PCI for left main coronary artery stenosis without the use of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). Patients were followed for a year, and the prognostic effect of PCI on a composite end-point of revascularization, new myocardial infarction, cardiac death, and on all-cause mortality was assessed in multivariable Cox analysis.

Results

The multivariable analysis showed a good prognosis in patients receiving PCI with a total event rate of 7.5%. The independent predictors for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were diabetes (p = 0.02). Other prognostic factors included in the model were gender, age, smoking, body mass index (BMI), hypertension, the complexity of the vessel, and ejection fraction.

Conclusion

PCI for left main coronary artery stenosis without the use of IVUS has a good prognosis after one year of clinical follow-up.

Meta-Analysis Comparing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting to Drug-Eluting Stents and to Medical Therapy Alone for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

Historically, coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery has been the standard revascularization method for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. Over the last decade, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown favorable results for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES) compared with CABG; however, no RCT has been conducted directly comparing DESs with medical therapy alone (MTA). Furthermore, the 2 most recently reported larger RCTs, using new-generation DESs reached somewhat conflicting conclusions comparing the 2 revascularization strategies. Therefore, we performed a traditional pairwise meta-analysis and Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare the efficacies of the 3 currently available treatment strategies (MTA, CABG, and DES) for unprotected LMCA disease. Scientific databases and websites were searched to find RCTs. Data from 8 trials including 4,850 patients were analyzed. Overall PCI increased the risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) driven by increased rate of revascularization compared with CABG, but no differences in all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, and recurrent myocardial infarction were found. However, early (i.e., within 30 days) PCI decreased the risk of MACCEs and stroke compared with CABG. In the mixed-treatment comparison models, both CABG and DESs were associated with better survival compared with MTA, but no difference was found between them. In conclusion, in patients with unprotected LMCA disease, PCI with DESs yields similar all-cause and cardiac mortalities compared with CABG. Furthermore, CABG increases early (i.e., within 30 days) MACCE rates, driven by an increased risk of stroke. Over longer durations, PCI increases MACCE rates because of increased recurrent revascularization.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Left Main Disease

For nearly half a century, coronary artery bypass grafting has been the standard treatment for patients with obstructive left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. However, there has been considerable evolution in the field of percutaneous coronary intervention, and especially, percutaneous coronary intervention for LMCA disease has been rapidly expanded with adoption of drug-eluting stents. Some, but not all randomized trials, have shown that percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents might be a suitable alternative for selected patients with LMCA disease instead of bypass surgery. However, none of previous trials involving early-generation drug-eluting stents was sufficiently powered and comparative trials using contemporary drug-eluting stents were limited. Recently, primary results of 2 new trials of EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Everolimus Eluting Stent Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) and NOBLE (Nordic-Baltic-British Left Main Revascularization Study) were reported. However, these trials showed conflicting results, which might pose uncertainty on the optimal revascularization strategy for LMCA disease. In this article, with the incorporation of a key review on evolution of LMCA treatment, we summarize the similarity or disparity of the EXCEL and NOBLE trials, focus on how they relate to previous trials in the field, and finally speculate on how the treatment strategy may be changed or recommended for LMCA treatment.

Two-year clinical outcomes in stable angina and acute coronary syndrome after percutaneous coronary intervention of left main coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND/AIMS

This study appraised the long term clinical outcomes of patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. There are limited data regarding long-term clinical outcomes after PCI for ULMCA disease.

METHODS

From 2001 to 2011, a total of 448 patients who underwent PCI for ULMCA disease and had 2-year clinical follow-up, were analyzed. The study patients were divided into two groups: group I (stable angina pectoris [SAP], n = 60, 48 men, 62 ± 10 years) and group II (acute coronary syndrome [ACS], n = 388, 291 men, 64 ± 10 years). We evaluated clinical and angiographic characteristics and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) during 2-year clinical follow-up.

RESULTS

Mean age of studied patients was 64 ± 10 years with 339 male patients. Average stent diameter was 3.6 ± 0.4 mm and stent length was 19.7 ± 6.3 mm. Stent implantation techniques and use of intravascular ultrasound guidance were not different between two groups. In-hospital mortality was 0% in group I and 7% in group II (p = 0.035). One-month mortality was 0% in group I and 7.7% in group II (p = 0.968). Two-year survival rate was 93% in the group I and 88.4% in the group II (p = 0.921). Predictive factors for 2-year MACE were hypertension, Killip class ≥ 3, and use of intra-aortic balloon pump by multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Although in-hospital mortality rate was higher in ACS than in SAP, clinical outcomes during 2-year clinical follow-up were similar between SAP and ACS after PCI of ULMCA.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease - A Single Hospital Experience without On-Site Cardiac Surgery

BACKGROUND

To investigate the safety and outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention for left main coronary artery disease in hospital without on-site cardiac surgery.

METHODS

Between January 2007 and December 2010, all patients diagnosed with left main coronary artery disease and refused coronary artery bypass graft surgery in our hospital or a tertiary center, were enrolled. Data including clinical course, angiographic characteristics, and 1- and 3-years outcomes were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

Seventy patients (mean age 73.4 ± 10.2 years, 47 male, 23 females) were treated with a mean SYNTAX score of 34.8 ± 12.6 and EuroSCORE of 6.7 ± 3.3. Thirty-two (45.7%) patients had stable angina, 35 (50.0%) had unstable angina/non ST-elevation myocardial infarction, and 3 (4.3%) had ST-elevation Myocardial infarction. Forty-three (61.4%) patients received a single-stent, 26 (37.1%) received two-stents, and 1 (1.4%) received balloon angioplasty. No procedure-related mortalities were noted and no emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery was required. In the 3-year follow-up period, 2 (2.9%) patients had non-fetal myocardial infarction, 11 (15.7%) had left main target lesion revascularization. The major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events rates were 24.3% at 1 year and 37.1% at 3-years. The all-cause mortality rate was 41.4% (29 patients), including 18 (25.7%) cases of septic shock, 7 (10.0%) of sudden cardiac death, 2 (2.8%) of hypovolemic shock due to upper gastrointestinal bleeding, 1 (1.4%) of terminal stage malignancy, and 1 (1.4%) of suffocation at 3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with left main coronary artery disease was found to be a safe and effective strategy in our hospital without on-site cardiac surgery.

KEY WORDS

Incomplete revascularization; Left main coronary artery (LM); No cardiac surgery; Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Comparison of the efficacy of drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents for the treatment of left main coronary artery disease

Background:

Recent studies reported that percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation was safe and feasible for the treatment of left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease in select patients. However, it is unclear whether drug-eluting stents (DESs) have better outcomes in patients with LMCA disease compared with bare-metal stent (BMS) during long-term follow-up in Chinese populations.

Methods:

From a perspective multicenter registry, 1136 consecutive patients, who underwent BMS or DES implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis, were divided into two groups: 1007 underwent DES implantation, and 129 underwent BMS implantation. The primary outcome was the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including cardiovascular (CV) death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 5 years postimplantation.

Results:

Patients in the DES group were older and more likely to have hyperlipidemia and bifurcation lesions. They had smaller vessels and longer lesions than patients in the BMS group. In the adjusted cohort of patients, the DES group had significantly lower 5 years rates of MACE (19.4% vs. 31.8%, P = 0.022), CV death (7.0% vs. 14.7%, P = 0.045), and MI (5.4% vs. 12.4%, P = 0.049) than the BMS group. There were no significant differences in the rate of TLR (10.9% vs. 17.8%, P = 0.110) and stent thrombosis (4.7% vs. 3.9%, P = 0.758). The rates of MACE (80.6% vs. 68.2%, P = 0.023), CV death (93.0% vs. 85.3%, P = 0.045), TLR (84.5% vs. 72.1%, P = 0.014), and MI (89.9% vs. 80.6%, P = 0.029) free survival were significantly higher in the DES group than in the BMS group. When the propensity score was included as a covariate in the Cox model, the adjusted hazard ratios for the risk of CV death and MI were 0.41 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21–0.63, P = 0.029) and 0.29 (95% CI: 0.08–0.92, P = 0.037), respectively.

Conclusions:

DES implantation was associated with more favorable clinical outcomes than BMS implantation for the treatment of LMCA disease even though there was no significant difference in the rate of TLR between the two groups.

Left Main Stem Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - Data and Ongoing Trials

Left main stem (LMS) disease is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Traditionally coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been the gold standard for treatment of these lesions. However over the past decade, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has assumed a more prominent role in the treatment of LMS disease. With the advent of newer drug-eluting stents (DES) with an improved risk factor profile, better intravascular imaging modalities and careful patient selection, the use of PCI in this cohort is expanding. We review the current data to support this and discuss the on-going trials that will hopefully shed more light into the management of this complex disease.

Safety and feasibility of coronary stenting in unprotected left main coronary artery disease in the real world clinical practice--a single center experience

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated the feasibility, safety, and prognostic outcome in patients with significant unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease undergoing stenting.

METHOD AND RESULTS

Between January 2010 and December 2012, totally 309 patients, including those with stable angina [13.9% (43/309)], unstable angina [59.2% (183/309)], acute non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) [24.3% (75/309)], and post-STEMI angina (i.e., onset of STEMI<7 days) [2.6% (8/309)] with significant ULMCA disease (>50%) undergoing stenting using transradial arterial approach, were consecutively enrolled. The patients' mean age was 68.9±10.8 yrs. Incidences of advance congestive heart failure (CHF) (defined as ≥ NYHA Fc 3) and multi-vessel disease were 16.5% (51/309) and 80.6% (249/309), respectively. Mechanical supports, including IABP for critical patients (defined as LVEF <35%, advanced CHF, or hemodynamically unstable) and extra-corporeal membrane oxygenator (ECMO) for hemodynamically collapsed patients, were utilized in 17.2% (53/309) and 2.6% (8/409) patients, respectively. Stent implantation was successfully performed in all patients. Thirty-day mortality rate was 4.5% (14/309) [cardiac death: 2.9% (9/309) vs. non-cardiac death: 1.6% (5/309)] without significant difference among four groups [2.3% (1) vs. 2.7% (5) vs. 9.3% (7) vs. 12.5% (1), p = 0.071]. Multivariate analysis identified acute kidney injury (AKI) as the strongest independent predictor of 30-day mortality (p<0.0001), while body mass index (BMI) and white blood cell (WBC) count were independently predictive of 30-day mortality (p = 0.003 and 0.012, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Catheter-based LM stenting demonstrated high rates of procedural success and excellent 30-day clinical outcomes. AKI, BMI, and WBC count were significantly and independently predictive of 30-day mortality.

Dual protection therapy with staged coronary artery bypass surgery and stenting in patients with left main coronary artery stenosis: long-term results from a single center

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the efficacy and safety of dual protection therapy with staged coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and bare-metal stenting (BMS) in patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease.

BACKGROUND

CABG is currently the preferred therapy for complex LMCA disease; however, the long-term patency rates of these grafts are unsatisfactory, and stenting alone for LMCA may be associated with the potentially fatal consequences of stent thrombosis or restenosis.

METHODS

Between January 1997 and October 2005, 42 patients underwent staged bypass surgery and BMS, with the latter procedure performed 2 weeks after the initial CABG. Of these patients, 40 received left internal mammary artery (LIMA) grafts, 34 saphenous vein grafts, 6 radial artery grafts, and 3 right IMA (RIMA) grafts. Minimally invasive bypass surgery was performed in 10 patients.

RESULTS

There were no operative complications. Forty-two stents were implanted in 42 lesions without complications. During the follow-up period of 135 ± 55 months, 1 patient died of cancer, 2 of cardiac causes, and 5 patients (12%) experienced target lesion revascularization. The target vessel failure rate was 24%. Forty patients (95%) underwent a 6-month angiographic follow-up. Restenosis was noted in 7 patients (18%). Reocclusion was also noted in 5 LIMA grafts, 5 saphenous vein grafts, 1 radial artery graft, and 1 RIMA graft. Only 1 patient experienced both restenosis of LM stenting and total occlusion of the 2 bypass grafts.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual protection therapy with staged CABG and stenting is not an appropriate therapeutic strategy because of unacceptable graft patency rate. A higher occlusive rate of the bypass grafts may result from decreased blood flow because of competing blood flow between the bypass graft and the native coronary vessel.

A case of extrinsic compression of the left main coronary artery secondary to pulmonary artery dilatation

Extrinsic compression of the left main coronary artery (LMCA) secondary to pulmonary artery dilatation is a rare syndrome. Most cases of pulmonary artery hypertension but no atherosclerotic risk factors rarely undergo coronary angiography, and hence, diagnoses are seldom made and proper management is often delayed in these patients. We describe a patient that presented with pulmonary hypertension, clinical angina, and extrinsic compression of the LMCA by the pulmonary artery, who was treated successfully by percutaneous coronary intervention. Follow-up coronary angiography showed patent stent in the LMCA in the proximity of the dilated main pulmonary artery. This case reminds us that coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention should be considered in pulmonary hypertension patients presenting with angina or left ventricular dysfunction.

Unprotected left main coronary stenting as alternative therapy to coronary bypass surgery in high surgical risk acute coronary syndrome patients

Acute coronary syndrome has a high mortality rate that dramatically increases in the presence of left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. Over the past decades, coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery has been commonly accepted as the standard of care for patients with LMCA stenosis and is still considered the first-line treatment in current practice guidelines. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of protected and unprotected LMCA has gained popularity and is increasingly utilized with comparable outcomes to CABG in randomized controlled trials. In-stent restenosis and the need for revascularization provide the main obstacle to LMCA revascularization. The advent of better PCI equipment, stents, ablative devices, intravascular ultrasound, hemodynamic support devices and antithrombotic agents have ignited a renewed interest in the practice of LMCA PCI, especially for high surgical risk patients who are neither candidates nor agreeable to CABG surgery. Herein, we review the studies comparing unprotected LMCA stenting with CABG surgery in regard to 3 main endpoints: mortality, major adverse events and the incidence of repeat revascularization.

Recovery of left ventricular function after percutaneous revascularization of a left main chronic total occlusion

Surgical revascularization of left main and/or three-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD) is associated with improved survival in patients with left ventricular dysfunction when compared to medical therapy and can result in improved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) [1]. Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is equivalent to surgery regarding short and intermediate term mortality, and left main PCI has emerged as a safe and effective alternate to surgical revascularization [2]. However, outcomes of unprotected left main PCI in patients with severely depressed LVEF have not been examined. We report a patient with left main chronic total occlusion, multivessel CAD, and dilated cardiomyopathy, in whom complete revascularization via PCI resulted in decreased left ventricular size and improved LVEF.

Surgical candidacy and selection biases in nonemergent left main stenting: implications for observational studies

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to characterize reasons for surgical ineligibility in patients undergoing nonemergent unprotected left main (ULM) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and to assess the potential for these reasons to confound comparative effectiveness studies of coronary revascularization.

BACKGROUND

Although both PCI and coronary artery bypass graft surgery are treatments for ULM disease, some patients are not eligible for both treatments, which may result in treatment selection biases.

METHODS

In 101 consecutive patients undergoing nonemergent ULM PCI, mixed methods were used to determine the prevalence of treatment selection dictated by surgical ineligibility and to identify the reasons cited for avoiding coronary artery bypass graft surgery. We then determined whether these reasons were captured by the ACC-NCDR (American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry) Cath-PCI dataset to assess the ability of this registry to account for biases in treatment selection. Finally, the association of surgical eligibility with long-term outcomes after ULM PCI was assessed.

RESULTS

Treatment selection was dictated by surgical ineligibility in over half the ULM PCI cohort with the majority having reasons for ineligibility not captured by the ACC-NCDR. Surgical ineligibility was a significant predictor of mortality after adjustment for Society of Thoracic Surgeons (hazard ratio [HR]: 5.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2 to 25), EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) (HR: 5.9, 95% CI: 1.3 to 27), or NCDR mortality scores (HR: 6.2, 95% CI: 1.4 to 27).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical ineligibility dictating treatment selection is common in patients undergoing nonemergent ULM PCI, occurs on the basis of risk factors not captured by the ACC-NCDR, and is independently associated with worse long-term outcomes after adjusting for standard risk scores.

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 of left main coronary artery disease

Coronary artery disease with left main stenosis is associated with the highest mortality of any coronary lesion. Studies in the 1970s and 1980s comparing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and medical therapy showed a significant survival benefit with revascularization. In the angioplasty era, initial experience with percutaneous intervention was associated with poor clinical outcomes. As a result, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was restricted to patients who were considered inoperable, or those with prior CABG with a functional graft to the left anterior descending or circumflex artery ("protected left main disease"). With the introduction of drug-eluting stents, there are new studies demonstrating comparable survival in patients who were revascularized using PCI and CABG, although percutaneous revascularization is associated with a higher rate of repeat revascularization. In the SYNTAX (Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) trial, the combined incidence of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke was similar between the CABG and PCI groups; however, the stroke rate was higher in the CABG group. The degree and extent of disease as defined by the SYNTAX scoring system has allowed for stratification of risk and improved assignment of patients with left main stenosis to either PCI or CABG.

Long-term clinical outcomes following elective stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been increasingly adopted for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictors of long-term clinical outcomes in patients after elective stent implantation for unprotected LMCA disease.

METHODS

A total of 122 patients with medically refractory angina who received coronary stenting for unprotected LMCA disease between August 1997 and December 2008 were included.

RESULTS

During the follow-up period of 45 ± 35 months (range: 1-137 months), the incidence of repeated PCI and/or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), and cardiovascular and total mortality were 28% (34 patients), 20% (24 patients), and 25% (31 patients), respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that young age [p = 0.02; hazard ratio (HR): 2.19, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11-4.30] and bare-metal stent (BMS) use (p = 0.02; HR: 5.35, 95% CI: 1.27-22.57) were the independent predictors of repeated PCI and/or CABG. Only lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) could predict both cardiovascular mortality (p = 0.003; HR: 4.25, 95% CI: 1.63-11.08) and total mortality (p = 0.002; HR: 3.95, 95% CI: 1.65-9.45). Lower LVEF (p = 0.001; HR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.16-0.61) and small stent size (p = 0.01; HR: 5.95, 95% CI: 1.43-24.80) could predict the composite endpoint, including target vessel revascularization and total mortality.

CONCLUSION

We showed that young age and BMS implantation could predict repeated PCI and/or CABG after stent implantation for unprotected LMCA disease. Only lower LVEF could predict both cardiovascular and total mortality. Lower LVEF and small stent size but not BMS implantation could predict composite target vessel revascularization/total mortality.

Drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents in unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

We undertook a meta-analysis to assess outcomes for drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare-metal stents (BMS) in percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis.

BACKGROUND

Uncertainty exists regarding the relative performance of DES versus BMS in percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main coronary stenosis.

METHODS

Of a total of 838 studies, 44 met inclusion criteria (n = 10,342). The co-primary end points were mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel/lesion revascularization (TVR/TLR), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE: mortality, MI, TVR/TLR).

RESULTS

Event rates for DES and BMS were calculated at 6 to 12 months, at 2 years, and at 3 years. Crude event rates at 3 years were mortality (8.8% and 12.7%), MI (4.0% and 3.4%), TVR/TLR (8.0% and 16.4%), and MACE (21.4% and 31.6%). Nine studies were included in a comparative analysis (n = 5,081). At 6 to 12 months the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for DES versus BMS were: mortality 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.06 to 15.48; p = 0.97), MI 0.64 (95% CI: 0.19 to 2.17; p = 0.47), TVR/TLR 0.10 (95% CI: 0.01 to 0.84; p = 0.01), and MACE 0.34 (95% CI: 0.15 to 0.78; p = 0.01). At 2 years, the OR for DES versus BMS were: mortality 0.42 (95% CI: 0.28 to 0.62; p < 0.01), MI 0.16 (95% CI: 0.01 to 3.53; p = 0.13), and MACE 0.31 (95% CI: 0.15 to 0.66; p < 0.01). At 3 years, the OR for DES versus BMS were: mortality 0.70 (95% CI: 0.53 to 0.92; p = 0.01), MI 0.49 (95% CI: 0.26 to 0.92; p = 0.03), TVR/TLR 0.46 (95% CI: 0.30 to 0.69; p < 0.01), and MACE 0.78 (95% CI: 0.57 to 1.07; p = 0.12).

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis suggests that DES is associated with favorable outcomes for mortality, MI, TVR/TLR, and MACE as compared to BMS in percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis.

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.

Bare metal stent implantation in large-sized unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis in the drug-eluting stent era

Recently, drug-eluting stent (DES) has been recommended as the first choice in those patients who need stent implantation in unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis. However, the long-term safety and efficacy of this procedure is still controversial. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of bare metal stent (BMS) implantation in ULMCA stenting in the DES era. We implanted BMS (mainly 4 mm-diameter) in large-sized ULMCA after December 2004 when DES became available. The results of BMS implantation (n = 19) were compared with those of DES implantation (n = 39). There was no significant difference between the 2 groups regarding age, gender and coronary risk factors. Emergency procedures were more frequently performed in the BMS group than in the DES group (53% vs. 26%, p = 0.08). The initial mortality was 10.5% (n = 2) in the BMS group and 2.6% (n = 1) in the DES group (p = 0.25). There was no stent thrombosis, Q-wave myocardial infarction or emergent bypass surgery in either group during their hospital stay. The restenosis rate was 0% (n = 45) in both groups, and the target vessel revascularization rate was 5.9% in the BMS group (1/17) and 2.6% (1/38) in the DES group (p = 0.53). Therefore, there were no statistically significant differences in outcomes between the two study groups. These results indicate that BMS implantation in a large-sized ULMCA may be a safe and effective treatment even in the DES era.

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.

Percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation versus coronary artery bypass surgery for treatment of left main coronary artery disease: is it time to change guidelines?

On the basis of clinical trials comparing coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) with medical therapy, current guideline recommend CABG as the treatment of choice for patients with asymptomatic ischemia, stable angina, or unstable angina/non-ST elevation myocardial infarction who have left main coronary artery disease. Percutaneous coronary intervention can be selectively performed in patients who are candidates for revascularization but who are ineligible for CABG. However, because of advances in periprocedural and postprocedural medical care in patients undergoing either CABG or percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting, new evaluation, and a review of current indications, may be required to determine the standard of care for patients with left main coronary artery disease. Current evidences indicate that stenting results in mortality and morbidity rates that compared favorably with those seen after CABG, suggesting that a current guideline (the Class III recommendation of percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main coronary artery disease) may no longer be justified. Data from several extensive registries and a large clinical trial may have prompted many interventional cardiologists to select percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting as an alternative revascularization strategy for such patients. In addition, these data may inform future guidelines and support the need for well-designed, adequately powered, prospective, randomized trials comparing the 2 revascularization strategies. The cumulative evidence from ongoing and future clinical trials will change the current clinical practice of revascularization for unprotected left main coronary artery disease, which was introduced several decades ago and which has continued to date without major revision.

Stenting versus bypass surgery for the treatment of left main coronary artery disease

Based on data comparing coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) with medical therapy, the current guidelines recommend CABG as the treatment of choice for patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can be selectively performed in patients who are candidates for revascularization but who are ineligible for CABG. Current evidence indicates that stenting results in mortality and morbidity rates compared favorably with those seen after CABG. Data from several extensive registries and a large clinical trial may have prompted many interventional cardiologists to choose PCI with stenting as an alternative treatment option for such patients. In addition, these data may inform future guidelines and support the need for well-designed, adequately powered, prospective, randomized trials comparing the two revascularization strategies.

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.