Revascularization Trends in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Presenting With Non–ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Insights From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry–Get with the Guidelines (NCDR ACTION Registry–GWTG)

STICH3C: Rationale and Study Protocol

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the recommended mode of revascularization in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction (iLVSD) and multivessel disease. However, contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) outcomes have improved with the integration of novel technologies and refinement of revascularization strategies, and PCI is often used in clinical practice in this population. There is a lack of evidence from randomized trials comparing contemporary state-of-the-art PCI versus CABG for the treatment of iLVSD and multivessel disease. This was the impetus for the STICH3C trial (Canadian CABG or PCI in Patients With Ischemic Cardiomyopathy), described here.

METHODS

The STICH3C trial is a prospective, unblinded, international, multicenter trial with an expected sample size of 754 participants from ≈45 centers. Patients with multivessel/left main coronary artery disease and iLVSD with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% considered by the local Heart Team appropriate for and amenable to revascularization by both modes of revascularization will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to state-of-the-art PCI or CABG.

RESULTS

The primary end point is the composite of death from any cause, stroke, spontaneous myocardial infarction, urgent repeat revascularization, or heart failure readmission, summarized as a time-to-event outcome. The key hierarchical end point is time to death and frequency of hospitalizations for heart failure. The key safety outcome is a composite of major adverse events. Disease-specific quality-of-life and health economics measures will be compared between groups. Participants will be followed for a median of 5 years, with a minimum follow-up of 4 years.

CONCLUSIONS

STICH3C will directly inform patients, clinicians, and international practice guidelines about the efficacy and safety of CABG versus PCI in patients with iLVSD. The results will provide novel and broad evidence, including clinical events, health status, and economic assessments, to guide care for patients with iLVSD and severe coronary artery disease.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/; Unique identifier: NCT05427370.

Impact of Diabetes on Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized With Acute Myocardial Infarction: Insights From the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study Community Surveillance

Background Diabetes is associated with increased risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The demographic trends, clinical presentation, management, and outcomes of patients with diabetes who are hospitalized with AMI have not been recently reported. Methods and Results The ARIC (Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities) study conducted hospital surveillance of AMI in 4 US communities. AMI was classified by physician review using a validated algorithm. Medications and procedures were abstracted from the medical record. From 2000 to 2014, 21 094 weighted hospitalizations for AMI were sampled. The prevalence of diabetes steadily increased, from 35% to 41% to 43% (P-trend<0.0001) across 2000 to 2004, 2005 to 2009, and 2010 to 2014, respectively. Patients with diabetes were older (61 versus 59 years of age), more often Black (44% versus 31%), and more commonly women (42% versus 34%). The burden of cardiovascular comorbidities was higher with diabetes and increased temporally. Patients with diabetes less often presented with ST-segment elevation (9% versus 17%) or acute chest pain (72% versus 80%), and had higher mean GRACE (Global Registry of Acute Coronary Syndrome) score (123 versus 109), Thrombolysis in Myocardial Ischemia (TIMI) score (4.3 versus 4.0), and Killip class (1.9 versus 1.5). Patients with diabetes had a lower adjusted probability of receiving aspirin (relative probability, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.91-0.99]), nonaspirin antiplatelets (0.93 [95% CI, 0.86-0.99]), coronary angiography (0.85 [95% CI, 0.78-0.92]), and coronary revascularization (0.85 [95% CI, 0.76-0.92]). Diabetes was associated with a 52% higher hazard of all-cause 1-year mortality (hazard ratio, 1.52 [95% CI, 1.23-1.89]). Conclusions Diabetes is associated with higher risk of death in patients hospitalized with AMI, highlighting the need for adherence to evidence-based therapies in this high-risk population.

New Criteria to Identify Patients at Higher Risk for Cardiovascular Complications After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

A universal definition to identify patients at higher risk of complications after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is lacking. We aimed to validate a recently developed score to identify patients at increased risk of all-cause death after PCI. All consecutive patients from a large PCI registry not presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction or cardiogenic shock were included. Each patient was assigned a score obtained by summing the points associated with the following variables: age >80 years (3 points), dialysis (6 points), left ventricular ejection fraction <30% (2 points), and multivessel PCI (2 points). Patients were stratified in 3 groups: low risk (score 0), intermediate risk (score 2 to 3), or high risk (score ≥4). The primary outcome was all-cause death, and the secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events and major bleeding. Events were assessed at 1 year after PCI. Between January 2014 and December 2019, 12,689 patients underwent PCI. Compared with the 9,884 patients at low risk, those at intermediate and high risk had a fourfold (hazard ratio 3.99, 95% confidence interval 2.95 to 5.38) and ninefold (hazard ratio 9.55, 95% confidence interval 6.89 to 13.2) higher hazard for all-cause death at 1 year, respectively. The score had a good predictive value for all-cause death at 1 year (area under the curve 0.70). The risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and major bleeding increased consistently from the low- to the high-risk group. In conclusion, in patients who underwent PCI for stable ischemic heart disease or non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome, a score based on 4 variables well predicted the risk of all-cause death at 1 year.

In-hospital major bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndrome medically treated with dual anti-platelet therapy: Associated factors and impact on mortality

Objective

Major bleeding is associated with poor hospital prognosis in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Despite its clinical importance, there are limited studies on the incidence and risk factors for major bleeding in ACS patients with dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT) without access to revascularization.

Methods

We analyzed data from 19,186 patients on DAPT after ACS with no access to revascularization from Clinical Pathway for Acute Coronary Syndrome in China Phase 3 (CPACS-3) cohort, which was conducted from 2011 to 2014. Major bleeding included intracranial hemorrhage, clinically significant bleeding, or bleeding requiring blood transfusion. Factors associated with in-hospital major bleeding were assessed using Poisson regressions with generalized estimating equations to account for the clustering effect.

Results

A total of 75 (0.39%) patients experienced major bleeding during hospitalization. Among subtypes of ACS, 0.65% of patients with STEMI, 0.33% with NSTEMI, and 0.13% with unstable angina had in-hospital major bleeding (p &lt; 0.001). The patients who experienced major bleeding had a longer length of stay (median 12 vs. 9 days, p = 0.011) and a higher all-cause in-hospital death rate (22.7 vs. 3.7%, p &lt; 0.001). Multivariable analysis showed advancing age (RR = 1.52 for every 10 years increase, 95% CI: 1.13, 2.05), impaired renal function (RR = 1.79, 95% CI: 1.10, 2.92), use of fibrinolytic drugs (RR = 2.93, 95% CI: 1.55, 5.56), and severe diseases other than cardiovascular and renal diseases (RR = 5.56, 95% CI: 1.10, 28.07) were associated with increased risk of major bleeding, whereas using renin–angiotensin system inhibitors (RR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.36, 0.81) was associated with decreased risk of major bleeding. These independent factors together showed good predictive accuracy with an AUC of 0.788 (95% CI: 0.734, 0.841).

Conclusion

Among ACS patients on DAPT, advancing age, impaired renal function, thrombolytic treatment, and severe comorbidities were independently associated with a higher risk of in-hospital major bleeding.

Impact of intravascular ultrasound in acute myocardial infarction patients at high ischemic risk

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Evidence for the role of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients at high ischemic risk of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is lacking. This study aimed to investigate the long-term clinical impact of IVUS-guided PCI in patients at high ischemic risk of AMI.

METHODS

Among 13 104 patients with AMI enrolled in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institutes of Health, we selected 8890 patients who underwent successful PCI with second-generation drug-eluting stent implantation and classified them into 2 groups based on whether or not they were at high ischemic risk or not, defined as any of the following: number of stents implanted ≥ 3, 3 vessels treated, ≥ 3 lesions treated, total stent length> 60mm, left main PCI, diabetes mellitus, and chronic kidney disease. The primary outcome was target lesion failure including cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization at 3 years.

RESULTS

In 4070 AMI patients at high ischemic risk, IVUS-guided PCI (21.6%) was associated with a significantly lower risk of target lesion failure at 3 years (6.7% vs 12.0%; HR, 0.54; 95%CI, 0.41-0.72; P <.001) than angiography-guided PCI. The results were consistent after confounder adjustment, inversed probability weighting, and propensity score matching.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients at high ischemic risk of AMI who underwent PCI with second-generation drug-eluting stent implantation, use of IVUS guidance was associated with a significant reduction in 3-year target lesion failure. iCreaT study No. C110016.

Determinants of Early and Late In-Hospital Mortality After Acute Myocardial Infarction A Sub-analysis of the OBTAIN Registry

BACKGROUND

Predictors of in-hospital mortality after myocardial infarction (MI) have been reported dichotomously: survival vs death. Predictors of time from admission to death have not been reported.

METHODS

A total of 7335 patients were enrolled in a prospective multicentre registry of acute MI. In-hospital mortality was classified by time from admission as acute (≤ 2 days), subacute (3 to 7 days), late (8 to 14 days), and very late (≥ 15 days) to identify factors associated with time to death in patients who died before discharge. Patient and MI characteristics, in-hospital interventions, and electrocardiographic findings were screened for differences in time to in-hospital death.

RESULTS

In-hospital death affected 351 patients (4.8%). Mean age was 72.0 ± 12.4 years, and 40.5% were female patients. Median survival was 5 days (interquartile range: 2-12), and 41% of in-hospital deaths occurred after 1 week. Cardiac biomarkers and ejection fraction were not related to time to in-hospital death. Previous MI, systolic blood pressure, pharmacologic therapy, and interventional treatments were different among the 4 groups. The factors associated with late in-hospital death were coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG), new-onset atrial fibrillation or flutter, heart failure or pulmonary edema, bleeding, and lung disease. Acute and subacute in-hospital death was associated with ST-elevation MI, lower systolic blood pressure, and cardiac arrest on admission. CABG was performed in 12% of post-MI patients who died in hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical risk factors for in-hospital mortality evolve over time immediately after acute MI. Understanding the time-dependent risk factors may allow for the development of new approaches to curtail the "later" in-hospital mortality.

Relationship between lipoprotein(a) and revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

As a residual risk factor for coronary heart disease, lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is associated with the occurrence of cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The revascularization rate after PCI is high among diabetic patients. However, the relationship between Lp(a) and revascularization after PCI in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains unclear.

METHODS

The investigation was a single-center, observational, retrospective cohort study. Patients with T2DM who were first diagnosed with ACS and underwent PCI were included in the study. As a result, 362 patients were enrolled and divided into three groups according to tertiles on basis of Lp(a) levels (11.48 mg/dL and 21.70 mg/dL). The incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including cardiac death, revascularization due to myocardial ischemia, readmission due to angina, and nonfatal stroke, was evaluated. Subgroups were established according to the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level (70 mg/dL).

RESULTS

During follow-up (median: 2.0 years), 69 MACEs occurred, and 76.81% of these patients underwent revascularization. The Lp(a) level in the MACE group was significantly higher than that in the non-MACE group (22.90 mg/dL vs. 14.10 mg/dL, p < .001). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events was significantly higher in the high Lp(a) groups than in the low Lp(a) groups (p = .001), mainly because of the increased occurrence of revascularization irrespective of LDL-C level (<70 mg/dL; ≥70 mg/dL, both p < .05) rather than death, nonfatal stroke, or hospital readmission due to angina (both p > .05). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve showed that the area under the curve (AUC) for Lp(a) in predicting the occurrence of MACE and revascularization were 0.664 and 0.668 respectively, both p < .05. Furthermore, multivariate Cox regression models indicated that Lp(a) was independently associated with revascularization [medium Lp(a) category: HR (95% CI): 2.988 (1.164-7.671), p = .023; high Lp(a) category: HR (95% CI): 4.937 (2.023-12.052), p < .001].

CONCLUSION

Lp(a) was an independent predictor of revascularization in patients with ACS complicated with T2DM, regardless of LDL-C levels. This suggests that Lp(a) measurement may help identify high-risk diabetic patients with ACS.

Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Elective High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

Background

The safety and feasibility of veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) as mechanical circulatory support in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HR-PCI) remain unclear.

Methods

This retrospective study included patients with complex and high-risk coronary artery disease who underwent elective PCI with VA-ECMO support pre-operatively during March 2019–December 2020. Rates of VA-ECMO-related complications, complications during PCI, death, myocardial infarction, and stroke during hospitalisation and 1-year post-operatively were analysed.

Results

Overall, 36 patients (average age: 63.6 ± 8.9 years) underwent PCI. The average duration of VA-ECMO support was 12.5 (range, 3.0–26.3) h. Intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation was used in 44.4% of patients. The SYNTAX score was 34.6 ± 8.4 pre-operatively and 10.8 ± 8.8 post-operatively (P < 0.001). Intraoperative complications included pericardial tamponade (N = 2, 5.6%), acute left-sided heart failure (N = 1, 2.8%), malignant arrhythmia requiring electrocardioversion (N = 2, 5.6%), and no deaths. Blood haemoglobin levels before PCI and 24 h after VA-ECMO withdrawal were 145.4 ± 20.2 g/L and 105.7 ± 21.7 g/L, respectively (P < 0.001). Outcomes during hospitalisation included death (N = 1, 2.8%), stroke (N = 1, 2.8%), lower limb ischaemia (N = 2, 5.6%), lower limb deep venous thrombosis (N = 1, 2.8%), cannulation site haematoma (N = 2, 5.6%), acute renal injury (N = 2, 5.6%), bacteraemia (N = 2, 5.6%), bleeding requiring blood transfusion (N = 5, 13.9%), and no recurrent myocardial infarctions. Within 1 year post-operatively, two patients (5.6%) were hospitalised for heart failure.

Conclusions

Veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation mechanical circulation support during HR-PCI is a safe and feasible strategy for achieving revascularisation in complex and high-risk coronary artery lesions. VA-ECMO-related complications require special attention.

Revascularization Strategies in Patients with Diabetes and Acute Coronary Syndromes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the current evidence for coronary revascularization in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) in the setting of an acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

RECENT FINDINGS

In patients with DM and stable multivessel ischemic heart disease, coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) has been observed to be superior to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in long-term follow-up, leading to lower rates of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization. In the ACS setting, PCI remains the most frequently performed procedure. In patients with an ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), primary PCI should be the revascularization method of choice, whenever feasible. Controversy still exists regarding when and how to deal with possible residual lesions. In the non-ST-segment-elevation (NSTE) ACS setting, although there are no data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), recent observational data and sub-analyses of randomized studies have suggested that CABG may be the preferred approach for patients with DM and multivessel coronary disease. There is a paucity of RCTs evaluating revascularization strategies (PCI and CABG) in patients with DM and ACS. CABG may be a viable strategy, leading to improved outcomes, especially following NSTE-ACS.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The guideline for coronary artery revascularization replaces the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines, providing a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered. Structure: Coronary artery disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Coronary revascularization is an important therapeutic option when managing patients with coronary artery disease. The 2021 coronary artery revascularization guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with coronary artery disease who are being considered for coronary revascularization, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The executive summary of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions coronary artery revascularization guideline provides the top 10 items readers should know about the guideline. In the full guideline, the recommendations replace the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery guideline and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines. This summary offers a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization, as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered. Structure: Recommendations from the earlier percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery guidelines have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians in caring for patients undergoing coronary revascularization. This summary includes recommendations, tables, and figures from the full guideline that relate to the top 10 take-home messages. The reader is referred to the full guideline for graphical flow charts, supportive text, and tables with additional details about the rationale for and implementation of each recommendation, and the evidence tables detailing the data considered in the development of this guideline.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The guideline for coronary artery revascularization replaces the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines, providing a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Coronary artery disease remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. Coronary revascularization is an important therapeutic option when managing patients with coronary artery disease. The 2021 coronary artery revascularization guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with coronary artery disease who are being considered for coronary revascularization, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests.

2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The executive summary of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions coronary artery revascularization guideline provides the top 10 items readers should know about the guideline. In the full guideline, the recommendations replace the 2011 coronary artery bypass graft surgery guideline and the 2011 and 2015 percutaneous coronary intervention guidelines. This summary offers a patient-centric approach to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with significant coronary artery disease undergoing coronary revascularization, as well as the supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2019 to September 2019, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, CINHL Complete, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2021, were also considered.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from the earlier percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass graft surgery guidelines have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians in caring for patients undergoing coronary revascularization. This summary includes recommendations, tables, and figures from the full guideline that relate to the top 10 take-home messages. The reader is referred to the full guideline for graphical flow charts, supportive text, and tables with additional details about the rationale for and implementation of each recommendation, and the evidence tables detailing the data considered in the development of this guideline.

Decade Long Temporal Trends in Revascularization for Patients With Diabetes Mellitus (From the Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group)

The FREEDOM trial demonstrated superiority of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and multivessel coronary artery disease (MV CAD) as compared to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug eluting stent (PCI-DES). We sought to study the impact of the FREEDOM trial on clinical practice. We studied trends in the use of CABG vs. PCI and factors associated with revascularization strategy among 6,985 patients with concomitant CAD and MV CAD at 7 centers pre- and post-trial (2008-2012 vs. 2013-2017) as well as hospital outcomes. Multivariable mixed effects logistic regression was performed to identify risk factors associated with choice of revascularization strategy among the patients with 3-vessel CAD (3V CAD). 41% of patients had 3V CAD and 18% were ≥75 years of age. While PCI-DES was the preferred strategy in 2-vessel CAD (2V CAD), 72% of patients with 3V CAD underwent CABG. For patients with 3V CAD, the ratio of CABG to PCI-DES procedures was 2.47 over the decade and did not differ pre- and post-trial (adjusted odds ratio (OR) for CABG (vs. PCI) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84-1.20). Independent risk factors of CABG among patients with DM and 3V CAD included peripheral arterial disease and absence of prior myocardial infarction and prior PCI. The risk factors for PCI were female sex (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.50-0.73, p<0.001) and age ≥75 (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.35-0.72, p<0.001). Center based variability was observed for CABG vs. PCI (center effect, rho=14%, p<0.001). In conclusion, PCI-DES is the preferred strategy for DM patients with MV CAD. Yet, among those with 3V CAD, CABG was chosen in ¾ of patients with no change in clinical practice related to the publication of the FREEDOM trial.

Coronary revascularization in patients with stable coronary disease and diabetes mellitus

PURPOSE OF STUDY

Diabetes mellitus accelerates the development of atherosclerosis. Patients with diabetes mellitus have higher incidence and mortality rates from cardiovascular disease and undergo a disproportionately higher number of coronary interventions compared to the general population. Proper selection of treatment modalities is thus paramount. Treatment strategies include medical management and interventional approaches including coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). The purpose of this review is to assimilate emerging evidence comparing CABG to PCI in patients with diabetes and present an outlook on the latest advances in percutaneous interventions, in addition to the optimal medical therapies in patients with diabetes.

KEY METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science and EMBASE was performed to identify prospective, randomized trials comparing outcomes of CABG and PCI, and also PCI with different generations of stents used in patients with diabetes. Additional review of bibliography of selected studies was also performed.

MAIN CONCLUSIONS

Most of the trials discussed above demonstrate a survival advantage of CABG over PCI in patients with diabetes. However, recent advances in PCI technology are starting to challenge this narrative. Superior stent designs, use of specific drug-eluting stents, image-guided stent deployment, and the use of contemporary antiplatelet and lipid-lowering therapies are continuing to improve the PCI outcomes. Prospective data for such emerging interventional technologies in diabetes is however lacking currently and is the need of the hour.

Trends in Reoperative Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery for Older Adults in the United States, 1998 to 2017

Background

The likelihood of undergoing reoperative coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) is important for older patients who are considering first‐time CABG. Trends in the reoperative CABG for these patients are unknown.

Methods and Results

We used the Medicare fee‐for‐service inpatient claims data of adults undergoing isolated first‐time CABG between 1998 and 2017. The primary outcome was time to first reoperative CABG within 5 years of discharge from the index surgery, treating death as a competing risk. We fitted a Cox regression to model the likelihood of reoperative CABG as a function of patient baseline characteristics. There were 1 666 875 unique patients undergoing first‐time isolated CABG and surviving to hospital discharge. The median (interquartile range) age of patients did not change significantly over time (from 74 [69–78] in 1998 to 73 [69–78] in 2017); the proportion of women decreased from 34.8% to 26.1%. The 5‐year rate of reoperative CABG declined from 0.77% (95% CI, 0.72%–0.82%) in 1998 to 0.23% (95% CI, 0.19%–0.28%) in 2013. The annual proportional decline in the 5‐year rate of reoperative CABG overall was 6.6% (95% CI, 6.0%–7.1%) nationwide, which did not differ across subgroups, except the non‐white non‐black race group that had an annual decline of 8.5% (95% CI, 6.2%–10.7%).

Conclusions

Over a recent 20‐year period, the Medicare fee‐for‐service patients experienced a significant decline in the rate of reoperative CABG. In this cohort of older adults, the rate of declining differed across demographic subgroups.

Long-Term Bleeding Risk Prediction with Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Acute Coronary Syndromes Treated Without Revascularization

BACKGROUND

Longitudinal bleeding risk scores have been validated in patients treated with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) following percutaneous coronary intervention. How these scores apply to the population of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) treated without revascularization remains unknown. The objective was to evaluate and compare the performances of the PRECISE-DAPT, PARIS, and DAPT (bleeding component) bleeding risk scores in the medically managed patients with ACS treated with DAPT.

METHODS AND RESULTS

TRILOGY ACS (Targeted Platelet Inhibition to Clarify the Optimal Strategy to Medically Manage Acute Coronary Syndromes) was a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial conducted from 2008 to 2012 over a median follow-up of 17.0 months in 966 sites (52 countries). High-risk patients with unstable angina or non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction who did not undergo revascularization were randomized to prasugrel or clopidogrel. The PRECISE-DAPT, PARIS, and DAPT (bleeding component) risk scores were applied in the TRILOGY ACS population to evaluate their performance to predict adjudicated non-coronary artery bypass grafting-related GUSTO (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries) severe/life-threatening/moderate and TIMI (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction) major/minor bleeding with time-dependent c-indices. Among the 9326 participants, median age was 66 years (interquartile range, 59-74 years), and 3650 were females (39.1%). A total of 158 (1.69%) GUSTO severe/life-threatening/moderate and 174 (1.87%) TIMI major/minor non-coronary artery bypass grafting bleeding events occurred. The c-indices (95% CI) of the PRECISE-DAPT, PARIS, and DAPT (bleeding component) scores through 12 months were 0.716 (0.677-0.758), 0.693 (0.658-0.733), and 0.674 (0.637-0.713), respectively, for GUSTO bleeding and 0.624 (0.582-0.666), 0.612 (0.578-0.651), and 0.608 (0.571-0.649), respectively, for TIMI bleeding. There was no significant difference in the c-indices of each score based upon pairwise comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

Among medically managed patients with ACS treated with DAPT, the performances of the PRECISE-DAPT, PARIS, and DAPT (bleeding component) scores were reasonable and similar to their performances in the derivation percutaneous coronary intervention populations. Bleeding risk scores may be used to predict longitudinal bleeding risk in patients with ACS treated with DAPT without revascularization and help support shared decision making. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00699998.

Clinical practice patterns in revascularization of diabetic patients with coronary heart disease: nationwide register study

Aims: To compare diabetic patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) needing revascularization to corresponding non-diabetic patients in terms of revascularization methods, comorbidities and urgency of procedure. We also examined the impact of patient characteristics and comorbidities on the revascularization method.Methods: We identified all diabetic (n = 33,018) and non-diabetic (n = 106,224) patients with first-ever, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) from electronic health records in Finland between 2000 and 2015.Results: Overall, PCI was the most common revascularization method. PCI outnumbered CABG in women and men both in diabetic and non-diabetic patients. However, diabetic patients were more likely to undergo CABG than PCI (OR 1.30; 95% CI 1.27-1.34, adjusted for age, gender, region of residence and procedure year). Moreover, 26.9% of diabetic patients' urgent procedures were CABG compared to 21.6% in non-diabetic patients (p<.001). Among diabetic patients, prior myocardial infarction was associated with increased odds of CABG, whereas female gender, atrial fibrillation, congestive heart failure, hypertension and later procedure year were associated with lower odds of CABG.Conclusions: CABG has been performed more frequently in diabetic than in non-diabetic CHD patients. Nevertheless, PCI was the dominant revascularization method over CABG both in diabetic and non-diabetic patients. KEY MESSAGESPCI was the dominant revascularization method in both diabetic and non-diabetic patients. Diabetic patients were more likely to undergo CABG than PCI when compared to non-diabetic patients (OR: 1.30; CI 1.27-1.34).Diabetic patients underwent urgent CABG procedures more often than non-diabetic patients and had more comorbidities compared to non-diabetic patients.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Temporal Trends in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: Insights From the Washington Cardiac Care Outcomes Assessment Program

Background

Patient selection and outcomes for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) have changed over the past decade. However, there is limited information on outcomes for both revascularization strategies in the same population. The study evaluated temporal changes in risk profile, procedural characteristics, and clinical outcomes for PCI‐ and CABG‐treated patients.

Methods and Results

We analyzed all PCI and isolated CABG between 2005 and 2017 in nonfederal hospitals in Washington State. Descriptive analysis was performed to evaluate temporal changes in risk profile and, risk‐adjusted in‐hospital mortality. Over the study period, 178 474 PCI and 36 592 CABG procedures were performed. PCI and CABG volume decreased by 2.9% and 22.6%, respectively. Compared with 2005–2009, patients receiving either form of revascularization between 2014 and 2017 had a higher prevalence of comorbidities including diabetes mellitus and hypertension and dialysis. Presentation with ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction (17% versus 20%) and cardiogenic shock (2.4% versus 3.4%) increased for patients with PCI compared with CABG. Conversely, clinical acuity decreased for patients receiving CABG over the study period. From 2005 to 2017, mean National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI mortality score increased for patients treated with PCI (20.1 versus 22.4, P<0.0001) and decreased for patients treated with CABG (18.8 versus 17.8, P<0.0001). Adjusted observed/expected in‐hospital mortality ratio increased for PCI (0.98 versus 1.19, P<0.0001) but decreased for CABG (1.21 versus 0.74, P<0.0001) over the study period.

Conclusions

Clinical acuity increased for patients treated with PCI rather than CABG. This resulted in an increase in adjusted observed/expected mortality ratio for patients undergoing PCI and a decrease for CABG. These shifts may reflect an increased use of PCI instead of CABG for patients considered to be at high surgical risk.

Trends in Guideline-Driven Revascularization in Diabetic Patients with Multivessel Coronary Heart Disease

In diabetes patients with chronic ≥3 vessel disease, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) holds a class I recommendation in the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) 2011 guidelines, and this classification has not changed to date. Much of the literature has focused upon whether CABG or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) produces better outcomes; there is a paucity of data comparing the odds of receiving these procedures. A secondary analysis was conducted in a de-identified database comprised of 30,482 patients satisfying the entry criteria. Odds of occurrence (CABG, PCI) were determined as the binary dependent variable in period 1, (17 October 2009 through 31 December 2011), and period 2 (1 January 2013 through 16 March 2015), before and after the 2011 guidelines, while controlling for gender, ethnicity/race, and ischemic heart disease as covariates. The odds of performing CABG rather than PCI in period 2 were not statistically significantly different than in period 1 (p = 0.400). The logistic regression model chi-square statistic was statistically significant, with χ₂ (7) = 308.850, p < 0.0001. The Wald statistic showed that ethnicity/race (African American, Caucasian, Hispanic and Other), gender, and heart disease contributed significantly to the prediction model with p < 0.05, but ethnicity ‘Unknown’ did not. The odds of CABG versus PCI in period 2 were 0.98 times those in period 1 95% confidence interval (CI) = (0.925, 1.032), statistically controlling for covariates. There was no significant rise in the odds of undergoing a CABG among this dataset of high-risk patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary heart disease. Modern practice has evolved regarding patient choice and additional variables that impact the final revascularization method employed. The degree to which odds of occurrence of procedures are a reliable surrogate for provider compliance with guidelines remains uncertain.

Weighing Coronary Revascularization Options in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are at increased risk for developing coronary artery disease. Choosing the optimal revascularization strategy, such as coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), may be difficult in this population. A large body of evidence suggests that, for patients with DM and stable multivessel ischemic heart disease, coronary artery bypass grafting is usually superior to PCI, leading to lower rates of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction and repeat revascularization in the long term. In patients with less complex coronary anatomy (2- or single-vessel disease, especially without involvement of the proximal left anterior descendent artery), PCI may be a viable option. Because these anatomic patterns are less frequent in patients with DM, there is less evidence to guide revascularization in these cases. Patients with DM and left main disease and those in the acute coronary syndrome setting are also underrepresented in randomized trials, and the best revascularization strategy for these patients is not clear. Once the revascularization procedure is performed, patients should be kept engaged in controlling the risk factors for progression of cardiovascular disease. Avoidance of smoking, control of cholesterol, blood pressure and glycemic levels; regular practice of physical activity of at least moderate intensity; and a balanced diet are of key importance in the post-revascularization period. In this study, we review the current literature in the management of patients with DM and coronary artery disease undergoing a revascularization procedure.

Urgent Revascularization Strategies in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and Acute Coronary Syndrome

The prevalence of diabetes mellitus (DM) is rising globally and in Canada. Besides being a risk factor for the development of coronary artery disease, DM is also a marker of poor prognosis in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), increasing the risks for ischemic and bleeding complications. Patients with DM have a high prevalence of multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD) and robust evidence has supported coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) as the optimal revascularization strategy in the setting of stable ischemic heart disease. In the acute scenario, particularly in patients with non-ST-segment elevation (NSTE) ACS (NSTE-ACS), there are many uncertainties regarding the best revascularization strategy. Most guidelines suggest an invasive and timely approach (that is, performing coronary catheterization within 72 hours after the onset of the NSTE-ACS) and make recommendations about choosing between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or CABG on the basis of data for patients with stable ischemic heart disease. Recent observational and subgroup analyses suggest that CABG might be the preferential method of revascularization for patients with DM and MVD also in the NSTE-ACS setting; however, dedicated randomized clinical trials are lacking. Finally, in patients who present with an ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, the initial revascularization method of choice is generally PCI, instead of fibrinolysis or CABG, and DM status most often does not influence this decision. The management of residual MVD after primary PCI for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, however, remains controversial.

Trials Comparing Percutaneous And Surgical Myocardial Revascularization: A Review

INTRODUCTION

Ischemic heart diseases are the major leading cause of death worldwide. Revascularization procedures dramatically reduced the overall risk for death related to acute coronary syndromes. Two kinds of myocardial revascularization can grossly be outlined: percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and surgical coronary artery bypass graft intervention (CABG). The net clinical benefit coming from these two kinds of procedures is still under debate.

METHODS

We have traced the state-of-the-art background about myocardial revascularization procedures by comparing the most important trials dealing with the evaluation of percutaneous interventions versus a surgical approach to coronary artery diseases.

RESULTS

Both PCI and CABG have become effective treatments for revascularization of patients suffering from advanced CAD. The advance in technology and procedural techniques made PCI an attractive and, to some extent, more reliable procedure in the context of CAD. However, there are still patients that cannot undergo PCI and have to be rather directed towards CABG.

CONCLUSION

CABG still remains the best strategy for the treatment of multiple vessel CAD due to improved results in term of survival and freedom from reintervention. Anyway, a systematic, multidisciplinary approach to revascularization is the fundamental behaviour to be chased in order to effectively help the patients in overcoming its diseases. The creation of the "heart team" seems to be a good option for the correct treatment of patients suffering from stable and unstable CAD.

Complete and incomplete revascularization in non-ST segment myocardial infarction with multivessel disease: long-term outcomes of first- and second-generation drug-eluting stents

The therapeutic effects of reperfusion strategies with complete revascularization (CR) or incomplete revascularization (IR) in non-ST segment myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients with multivessel disease (MVD) are controversial. In such patients, whether utilization of different generations of drug-eluting stents (DES) for IR or CR affect long-term major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) is unknown. This study included 702 NSTEMI patients with MVD who received first-generation (1G) or second-generation (2G) DES. In multivariable analysis, chronic kidney disease, chronic total, 1G DES and IR were independent predictors of long-term MACE. In patients receiving 1G DES, no significant differences of MACE were observed between the IR and CR groups (39.1% vs. 36.2%, p = 0.854). However, in patients receiving 2G DES, significantly fewer MACE were observed in the CR group than in the IR group (3.7% vs. 10.2%, p = 0.002). Compared with patients receiving 1G DES for IR, those receiving 2G DES for IR and CR exhibited significantly lower risk of MACE (59% and 83% lower, respectively). CR could not provide clinical benefits over IR in NSTEMI patients with MVD receiving 1G DES. However, in patients receiving 2G DES, compared with IR, CR was associated with a lower risk of long-term MACE, which was mainly caused by low rates of non-TLR and any revascularization.

Differences of in-hospital outcomes within patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention at institutions with high versus low procedural volume: a report from the Japanese multicentre percutaneous coronary intervention registry

Objective

We aimed to determine the relationship between the prevalence of in-hospital complications and annual institutional patient volume in a population of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Methods

Clinical data of patients receiving PCI between January 2010 and June 2015 were collected from 14 academic institutions in the Tokyo area and subsequently used for analysis. We employed multivariate hierarchical logistic regression models to determine the effect of institutional volume on several in-hospital outcomes, including in-hospital mortality and procedure-related complications.

Results

A total of 14 437 PCI cases were included and categorised as receiving intervention from either lower-volume (<200 procedures/year, n=6 hospitals) or higher-volume (≥200 procedures/year, n=8 hospitals) institutions. Clinical characteristics differed significantly between the two patient groups. Specifically, patients treated in higher-volume hospitals presented with increased comorbidities and complex coronary lesions. Unadjusted mortality and complication rate in lower-volume and higher-volume hospitals were 1.3% and 1.2% (p=0.0614) and 6.2% and 8.1% (p=0.001), respectively. However, multivariate hierarchical logistic regression models adjusting for differences in the patient characteristics demonstrated that institutional volume was not associated with adverse clinical outcomes.

Conclusions

In conclusion, we observed no significant association between annual institutional volume and in-hospital outcomes within the contemporary PCI multicentre registry.

Trial registration number

UMIN R000005598.

Revascularization for patients with diabetes mellitus and stable ischemic heart disease: an update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an update on the management of patients with diabetes mellitus and requiring coronary revascularization.

RECENT FINDINGS

Evidence continues to show that patients with diabetes mellitus and ischemic heart disease represent a very high-risk group of patients. Choice of stent appears important for minimizing target lesion and target vessel adverse events with everolimus eluting stents having the best performance, particularly in patients being treated with insulin. The higher risk of adverse angioplasty results in patients with diabetes appears most related to the disease state per se and not necessarily to anatomical complexities. Interestingly, physiologic documentation of nonischemia producing lesions with use of fractional flow reserve appears less reassuring in this setting of aggressive and rapid atherosclerosis progression, particularly if myocardial infarction has occurred previously, than in patients without diabetes. Coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with appropriate anatomy and diabetes continues to emerge in many analyzes as the optimal, long-term therapy.

IMPLICATIONS

The treatment of diabetes per se, advances in stent technology and optimization of coronary artery bypass techniques are all occurring in parallel making it very critical for the design of modern era trials that keep pace with these advances. Currently, in patients with appropriate anatomy who are willing candidates, bypass surgery remains the optimal, long-term therapeutic option.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery and the SYNTAX score: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The SYNTAX [Synergy Between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) With Taxus and coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG)] score is a decision-making tool in interventional cardiology. However, several facts still remain to be addressed: What about PCI or CABG with a low versus a high score respectively? And what about PCI with a low score versus CABG with a high score? Electronic databases were carefully searched for relevant publications. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated and the analysis was carried out by RevMan 5.3. Eleven studies with a total number of 11,037 patients were included. In terms of clinical outcomes, this analysis showed PCI to have significantly favored patients with a low versus a high SYNTAX score. In patients who were re-vascularized by CABG, mortality and major adverse cardiac events were significantly lower with a low SYNTAX score. However, when PCI with a low SYNTAX score was compared with CABG with a high SYNTAX score, no significant difference in mortality and combined death/stroke/myocardial infarction were observed. In conclusion, the SYNTAX score might be considered useful in interventional cardiology. Nevertheless, the fact that it has limitations when compared to newer tools should also not be ignored.

Can the onset of heart failure be delayed by treating diabetic cardiomyopathy?

The pathophysiology of diabetic cardiomyopathy (DC) is not fully understood. This frequently undiagnosed complication of chronic hyperglycemia leads to heart failure (HF). However, it is suggested that an appropriate metabolic control of diabetes at an early stage of this deleterious disease, is able to inhibit the development and progression of DC to HF. Recently, it has been postulated that myocardial ischaemia plays an important role in the development of this pathology. Results of the antianginal pharmacological treatment and revascularization are unsatisfactory and reveal a gap in our knowledge and current approaches to treating DC. Most recent studies emphasize the ischaemic component of DC as a key target for therapeutic strategies, which could change its unfavorable history. More stress is put on an early diagnosis of coronary artery disease (CAD), promoting prompt revascularization. Choosing the accurate time of surgical revascularization, with the inclusion of the metabolic background, can ensure complete revascularization with better prognosis. This review will focus on the complexity of DC and summarize contemporary knowledge of treatment strategies for patients with diabetes and CAD.

Treatment of Higher-Risk Patients With an Indication for Revascularization: Evolution Within the Field of Contemporary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Patients with severe coronary artery disease with a clinical indication for revascularization but who are at high procedural risk because of patient comorbidities, complexity of coronary anatomy, and/or poor hemodynamics represent an understudied and potentially underserved patient population. Through advances in percutaneous interventional techniques and technologies and improvements in patient selection, current percutaneous coronary intervention may allow appropriate patients to benefit safely from revascularization procedures that might not have been offered in the past. The burgeoning interest in these procedures in some respects reflects an evolutionary step within the field of percutaneous coronary intervention. However, because of the clinical complexity of many of these patients and procedures, it is critical to develop dedicated specialists within interventional cardiology who are trained with the cognitive and technical skills to select these patients appropriately and to perform these procedures safely. Preprocedural issues such as multidisciplinary risk and treatment assessments are highly relevant to the successful treatment of these patients, and knowledge gaps and future directions to improve outcomes in this emerging area are discussed. Ultimately, an evolution of contemporary interventional cardiology is necessary to treat the increasingly higher-risk patients with whom we are confronted.