Transradial Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Unprotected Left Main and/or Multivessel Disease in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome

Safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft in patients with STEMI and unprotected left main stem disease: A systematic review & meta-analysis

Introduction

Owing to its large area of supply, left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) has the highest mortality rate among coronary artery lesions, resulting in debate about its optimal revascularization technique. This meta-analysis compares percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for the treatment of LMCAD.

Method

MEDLINE, TRIP, and Cochrane Central databases were queried from their inception until 25 April 2021, to determine MACCE (major adverse cardiac and cardiovascular events), all-cause mortality, repeat revascularization, myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke rates post-revascularization for different follow-ups. 7 RCTs and 50 observational studies having 56,701 patients were included. A random-effects model was used with effect sizes calculated as odds ratios (odds ratio, OR).

Results

In the short term (1 year), PCI had significantly higher repeat revascularizations (OR = 3.58, 95% CI 2.47-5.20; p < 0.00001), but lower strokes (OR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.38-0.81; p = 0.002). In the intermediate term (2-5 years), PCI had significantly higher rates of repeat revascularizations (OR = 3.47, 95% CI 2.72-4.44; p < 0.00001) and MI (OR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.17-1.64; p = 0.0002), but significantly lower strokes (OR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.42-0.70; p < 0.0001). PCI also had significantly higher repeat revascularizations (OR = 2.58, 95% CI 1.89-3.52; p < 0.00001) in the long term (≥5 years), while in the very long term (≥10 years), PCI had significantly lower all-cause mortalities (OR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.61-0.96; p = 0.02).

Conclusion

PCI was safer than CABG for patients with stroke for most follow-ups, while CABG was associated with lower repeat revascularizations. However, further research is required to determine PCI's safety over CABG for reducing post-surgery MI.

Two-Year Outcomes after Left Main Coronary Artery Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients Presenting with Acute Coronary Syndrome

Objectives

We aim to evaluate long-term outcomes after left main coronary artery (LMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Background

PCI of the LMCA has been an acceptable revascularization strategy in stable coronary artery disease. However, limited studies on long-term clinical outcomes of LMCA PCI in ACS patients are available.

Methods

A total of 6429 consecutive patients with ACS undergoing PCI in Fuwai Hospital in 2013 were enrolled. Patients are divided into LMCA group and Non-LMCA group according to whether the target lesion was located in LMCA. Prognosis impact on 2-year major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) is analyzed.

Results

155 (2.4%) patients had target lesion in LMCA, while 6274 (97.6%) patients belong to the non-LMCA group. Compared with non-LMCA patients, LMCA patients have generally more comorbidities and worse baseline conditions. Two-year follow-up reveals that LMCA patients have significantly higher rate of cardiac death (2.6% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.034), myocardial infarction (7.1% vs. 1.8%, p < 0.001), in-stent thrombosis (4.5% vs. 0.8%, p < 0.001), and stroke (7.1% vs. 6.4%, p = 0.025). After adjusting for confounding factors, LMCA remains independently associated with higher 2-year myocardial infarction rate (HR = 2.585, 95% CI = 1.243-5.347, p = 0.011).

Conclusion

LMCA-targeted PCI is an independent risk factor for 2-year myocardial infarction in ACS patients.

Long term outcomes of drug-eluting stent versus coronary artery bypass grafting for left main coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis

Background

It is still controversial whether percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent (DES) is safe and effective compared to coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease at long-term follow up (≥ 3 years).

Methods

Eligible studies were selected by searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library up to December 6, 2016. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke during the longest follow-up. Death, cardiac death, MI, stroke and repeat revascularization were the secondary outcomes.

Results

Four randomized controlled trials and twelve adjusted observational studies involving 14,130 patients were included. DES was comparable to CABG regarding the occurrence of the primary endpoint (HR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.86–1.03). Besides, DES was significantly associated with higher incidence of MI (HR = 1.56, 95% CI: 1.09–2.22) and repeat revascularization (HR = 3.09, 95% CI: 2.33–4.10) compared with CABG, while no difference was found between the two strategies regard as the rate of death, cardiac death and stroke. Furthermore, DES can reduce the risk of the composite endpoint of death, MI or stroke (HR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.67–0.95) for ULMCA lesions with SYNTAX score ≤ 32.

Conclusions

Although with higher risk of repeat revascularization, PCI with DES appears to be as safe as CABG for ULMCA disease at long-term follow up. In addition, treatment with DES could be an alternative interventional strategy to CABG for ULMCA lesions with low to intermediate anatomic complexity.

Drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting for left-main coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVES

To compare follow-up outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DES-PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left-main coronary artery disease (LMCAD), we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies with propensity-score analysis.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched through November 2016. Eligible studies were RCTs or observational studies with propensity-score analysis of DES-PCI versus CABG enrolling patients with LMCAD and reporting ≥ 6-month mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or repeat revascularization (RRV). Study-specific estimates were combined using inverse variance-weighted averages of logarithmic hazard ratios (HRs) in the random-effects model.

RESULTS

We identified 5 RCTs and 17 observational studies with propensity-score analysis enrolling a total of 12,387 patients. Pooled analysis demonstrated a significant increase in a composite of death, MI, and RRV (with/without stroke) after DES-PCI (HR, 1.42; P < 0.00001); no significant difference in a composite of death and MI (with/without stroke); no significant differences in mortality and stroke; a strong trend toward an increase in MI after DES-PCI (HR, 1.44; P = 0.05); and significant increases in any (HR, 1.86; P < 0.00001), target-vessel (HR, 3.28; P < 0.00001), and target-lesion RRV (HR, 2.26; P = 0.003) after DES-PCI.

CONCLUSIONS

When compared with CABG, DES-PCI for LMCAD was associated with increases in RRV and the composite of death, MI, and RRV (with/without stroke), despite no differences in mortality, MI, stroke, and the composite of death and MI (with/without stroke).