Canadian Cardiovascular Society 2023 Guidelines on the Fitness to Drive

Cardiovascular conditions are among the most frequent causes of impairment to drive, because they might induce unpredictable mental state alterations via diverse mechanisms like myocardial ischemia, cardiac arrhythmias, and vascular dysfunction. Accordingly, health professionals are often asked to assess patients' fitness to drive (FTD). The Canadian Cardiovascular Society previously published FTD guidelines in 2003-2004; herein, we present updated FTD guidelines. Because there are no randomized trials on FTD, observational studies were used to estimate the risk of driving impairment in each situation, and recommendations made on the basis of Canadian Cardiovascular Society Risk of Harm formula. More restrictive recommendations were made for commercial drivers, who spend longer average times behind the wheel, use larger vehicles, and might transport a larger number of passengers. We provide guidance for individuals with: (1) active coronary artery disease; (2) various forms of valvular heart disease; (3) heart failure, heart transplant, and left ventricular assist device situations; (4) arrhythmia syndromes; (5) implantable devices; (6) syncope history; and (7) congenital heart disease. We suggest appropriate waiting times after cardiac interventions or acute illnesses before driving resumption. When short-term driving cessation is recommended, recommendations are on the basis of expert consensus rather than the Risk of Harm formula because risk elevation is expected to be transient. These recommendations, although not a substitute for clinical judgement or governmental regulations, provide specialists, primary care providers, and allied health professionals with a comprehensive list of a wide range of cardiac conditions, with guidance provided on the basis of the level of risk of impairment, along with recommendations about ability to drive and the suggested duration of restrictions.

Can Machine Learning Aid the Selection of Percutaneous vs Surgical Revascularization?

BACKGROUND

In patients with 3-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD) and/or left main CAD, individual risk prediction plays a key role in deciding between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess whether these individualized revascularization decisions can be improved by applying machine learning (ML) algorithms and integrating clinical, biological, and anatomical factors.

METHODS

In the SYNTAX (Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) study, ML algorithms (Lasso regression, gradient boosting) were used to develop a prognostic index for 5-year death, which was combined, in the second stage, with assigned treatment (PCI or CABG) and prespecified effect-modifiers: disease type (3-vessel or left main CAD) and anatomical SYNTAX score. The model's discriminative ability to predict the risk of 5-year death and treatment benefit between PCI and CABG was cross-validated in the SYNTAX trial (n = 1,800) and externally validated in the CREDO-Kyoto (Coronary REvascularization Demonstrating Outcome Study in Kyoto) registry (n = 7,362), and then compared with the original SYNTAX score II 2020 (SSII-2020).

RESULTS

The hybrid gradient boosting model performed best for predicting 5-year all-cause death with C-indexes of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.75-0.81) in cross-validation and 0.77 (95% CI: 0.76-0.79) in external validation. The ML models discriminated 5-year mortality better than the SSII-2020 in the external validation cohort and identified heterogeneity in the treatment benefit of CABG vs PCI.

CONCLUSIONS

An ML-based approach for identifying individuals who benefit from CABG or PCI is feasible and effective. Implementation of this model in health care systems-trained to collect large numbers of parameters-may harmonize decision making globally. (Synergy Between PCI With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery: SYNTAX Extended Survival [SYNTAXES]; NCT03417050; SYNTAX Study: TAXUS Drug-Eluting Stent Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for the Treatment of Narrowed Arteries; NCT00114972).

Post-contrast Acute Kidney Injury After Emergent and Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (from the CREDO-Kyoto PCI/CABG Registry Cohort 3)

Post-contrast acute kidney injury (PC-AKI) is a common complication after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, it is unclear whether or not the effects of PC-AKI on long-term clinical outcomes were different between emergent and elective procedures. Among patients enrolled in the CREDO-Kyoto PCI/CABG (Coronary Revascularization Demonstrating Outcome Study in Kyoto Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting) registry cohort 3, we identified 10,822 patients treated using PCI (emergent PCI stratum: n = 5,022 [46%] and elective PCI stratum: n = 5,860 [54%]). PC-AKI was defined as ≥0.3 mg/100 ml absolute or 1.5-fold relative increase of serum creatinine within 72 hours after PCI. The incidence of PC-AKI was significantly higher after emergent PCI than after elective PCI (10.5% vs 3.7%, p <0.001). In the multivariable logistic regression model, emergent PCI was the strongest independent risk factor for PC-AKI in the entire study population. The excess adjusted risk of patients with PC-AKI relative to those without remained significant for all-cause death in both the emergent and elective PCI strata (hazard ratio 1.87, 95% confidence interval 1.59 to 2.21, p <0.001 and hazard ratio 1.31, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.68, p = 0.03, respectively). There was a significant interaction between the PCI setting (emergent and elective) and the effect of PC-AKI on all-cause death, with a greater magnitude of effect in the emergent PCI stratum than in the elective PCI stratum (p for interaction = 0.01). In conclusion, the incidence of PC-AKI was 2.8 times higher after emergent PCI than after elective PCI. The excess mortality risk of PC-AKI relative to no PC-AKI was greater after emergent PCI than after elective PCI.

Selecting the optimal treatment for left main coronary disease: The importance of identifying subgroups of patients

Randomized trials of stenting versus surgery for patients with unprotected left main (LM) coronary stenosis have largely shown similar survival between the two interventions. However, patients with LM stenosis represent a heterogeneous group in which subgroups likely to benefit from one therapy more than another are difficult to identify. Increasing coronary disease burden is the most accepted subgrouping for identifying optimal therapy but this can be defined in more detail allowing greater discrimination. Competitive flow reduces bypass graft patency in patients with isolated LM stenosis and complex bifurcation stenoses reduce the effectiveness of coronary stenting. The evidence for LM stenosis subgroupings is presented.

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.

Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Performed by Japanese Expert Operators in Patients With Chronic Total Occlusion

BACKGROUND

The appropriateness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic total occlusion (CTO) lesions has rarely been investigated.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The Japanese CTO-PCI Expert Registry enrolled consecutive patients undergoing CTO-PCI carried out by highly experienced Japanese CTO specialists who performed more than 50 CTO-PCIs per year and 300 CTO-PCIs in total. This study included patients undergoing CTO-PCI between January 2014 and December 2019. The appropriateness, trends, and differences among the procedures performed by the operators using the 2017 appropriate use criteria were analyzed. Furthermore, we performed a logistic regression analysis to assess whether the appropriateness was associated with in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). Of the 5,062 patients who underwent CTO-PCI, 4,309 (85.1%) patients who did not undergo the non-invasive stress test were classified as having no myocardial ischemia. Of the total cases, 3,150 (62.2%) were rated as "may be appropriate," and 642 (12.7%) as "rarely appropriate" CTO-PCI cases. The sensitivity analyses showed that the number (%) of "may be appropriate" ranged from 4,125 (57.8%) to 4,744 (66.4%) and the number of "rarely appropriate" ranged from 843 (11.8%) to 970 (13.6%) among best and worst scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large Japanese CTO-PCI registry, approximately 13% of CTO-PCI procedures were classified as "rarely appropriate". Substantial efforts would be required to decrease the number of "rarely appropriate" CTO-PCI procedures.

External Validation of the SYNTAX Score II 2020

BACKGROUND

The SYNTAX score II 2020 (SSII-2020) was derived from cross correlation and externally validated in randomized trials to predict death and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACE) following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with 3-vessel disease (3VD) and/or left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD).

OBJECTIVES

The authors aimed to investigate the SSII-2020's value in identifying the safest modality of revascularization in a non-randomized setting.

METHODS

Five-year mortality and MACE were assessed in 7,362 patients with 3VD and/or LMCAD enrolled in a Japanese PCI/CABG registry. The discriminative abilities of the SSII-2020 were assessed using Harrell's C statistic. Agreement between observed and predicted event rates following PCI or CABG and treatment benefit (absolute risk difference [ARD]) for these outcomes were assessed by calibration plots.

RESULTS

The SSII-2020 for 5-year mortality well predicted the prognosis after PCI and CABG (C-index = 0.72, intercept = -0.11, slope = 0.92). When patients were grouped according to the predicted 5-year mortality ARD, <4.5% (equipoise of PCI and CABG) and ≥4.5% (CABG better), the observed mortality rates after PCI and CABG were not significantly different in patients with lower predicted ARD (observed ARD: 2.1% [95% CI: -0.4% to 4.4%]), and the significant difference in survival in favor of CABG was observed in patients with higher predicted ARD (observed ARD: 9.7% [95% CI: 6.1%-13.3%]). For MACE, the SSII-2020 could not recommend a specific treatment with sufficient accuracy.

CONCLUSIONS

The SSII-2020 for predicting 5-year death has the potential to support decision making on revascularization in patients with 3VD and/or LMCAD.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Graftinge Among Patients with Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease in the New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents Era (From the CREDO-Kyoto PCI/CABG Registry Cohort-3)

Long-term safety of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) as compared with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is still controversial in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCAD), and there is a scarcity of real-world data on the comparative long-term clinical outcomes between PCI and CABG for ULMCAD in new-generation drug-eluting stents era. The CREDO-Kyoto PCI/CABG registry Cohort-3 enrolled 14927 consecutive patients undergoing first coronary revascularization with PCI or isolated CABG between January 2011 and December 2013, and we identified 855 patients with ULMCAD (PCI: N = 383 [45%], and CABG: N = 472 [55%]). The primary outcome measure was all-cause death. Median follow-up duration was 5.5 (interquartile range: 3.9 to 6.6) years. The cumulative 5-year incidence of all-cause death was not significantly different between the PCI and CABG groups (21.9% vs 17.6%, Log-rank p = 0.13). After adjusting confounders, the excess risk of PCI relative to CABG remained insignificant for all-cause death (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.47; p = 0.99). There were significant excess risks of PCI relative to CABG for myocardial infarction and any coronary revascularization (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.30 to 3.37; p = 0.002, and HR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.96 to 4.46; p < 0.001), whereas there was no significant excess risk of PCI relative to CABG for stroke (HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.41; p = 0.52). In conclusion, there was no excess long-term mortality risk of PCI relative to CABG, while the excess risks of PCI relative to CABG were significant for myocardial infarction and any coronary revascularization in the present study population reflecting real-world clinical practice in Japan.

Age-Stratified Outcome in Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: A NOBLE Trial Substudy

BACKGROUND

In the treatment of left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease, patients' age may affect the clinical outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This study stratified the clinical outcome according to the age of patients treated for LMCA stenosis with PCI or CABG in the Nordic-Baltic-British Left Main Revascularization (NOBLE) study.

METHODS

Patients with LMCA disease were enrolled in 36 centers in northern Europe and randomized 1:1 to treatment by PCI or CABG. Eligible patients had stable angina pectoris, unstable angina pectoris, or non-ST elevation myocardial infarction. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), a composite of all-cause mortality, nonprocedural myocardial infarction, any repeat coronary revascularization, and stroke. Age-stratified analysis was performed for the groups younger and older than 67 years and for patients older than 80 years.

RESULTS

For patients ≥67 years, the 5-year MACCEs were 35.7 versus 22.3% (hazard ratio [HR] 1.72 [95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27-2.33], p = 0.0004) for PCI versus CABG. The difference in MACCEs was driven by more myocardial infarctions (10.8 vs. 3.8% HR 3.01 [95% CI 1.52-5.96], p = 0.0009) and more repeat revascularizations (19.5 vs. 10.0% HR 2.01 [95% CI 1.29-3.12], p = 0.002). In patients younger than 67 years, MACCE was 20.5 versus 15.3% (HR 1.38 [95% CI 0.93-2.06], p = 0.11 for PCI versus CABG. All-cause mortality was similar after PCI and CABG in both age-groups. On multivariate analysis, age was a predictor of MACCE, along with PCI, diabetes, and SYNTAX score.

CONCLUSIONS

As the overall NOBLE results show revascularization of LMCA disease, age of 67 years or older was associated with lower 5-year MACCE after CABG compared to PCI. Clinical outcomes were not significantly different in the subgroup younger than 67 years, although no significant interaction was present between age and treatment. Mortality was similar for all subgroups (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01496651).

Procedural Volume and Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease-Report From the National Clinical Data (J-PCI Registry)

Background There is a limited evidence base to support the volume-outcome relationship in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for unprotected left main coronary artery disease (UPLMD). This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between institutional and operator volume and in-hospital outcomes in patients undergoing PCI for unprotected left main coronary artery disease. Methods and Results We analyzed characteristics and clinical outcomes of 24 320 patients undergoing PCI for unprotected left main coronary artery disease at 1102 hospitals by 7244 operators using data from the Japanese nationwide J-PCI Registry (National PCI Data Registry) between January 2014 and December 2017. We classified institutions and operators into quartiles based on the mean annual volume of PCI. A generalized linear mixed-effects model was used to evaluate the association between institutional and operator PCI volume and in-hospital outcomes. Among the 24 320 patients, 4027 (16.6%), 6147 (25.3%), and 14 146 (58.2%) presented with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome, and stable ischemic heart disease; their crude in-hospital mortality was 15%, 3.1%, and 0.3%, respectively. Compared with patients in the lowest quartile of institutional volume (1-216 PCIs/y), the adjusted odds ratio of in-hospital death in patients in the second (217-323 PCIs/y), third (324-487 PCIs/y), and fourth (488-3015 PCIs/y) quartile of institutional volume was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.51-1.10; P=0.14), 0.87 (95% CI, 0.57-1.34; P=0.54), and 0.51 (95% CI, 0.30-0.86; P=0.01), respectively. These findings were consistent in rates of in-hospital death or any complication. Conversely, operator PCI volume was not significantly associated with in-hospital outcomes. Conclusions Institutional rather than operator-based PCI volume was associated with better in-hospital outcomes in patients undergoing PCI for unprotected left main coronary artery disease.

Surgical Ineligibility and Long-Term Outcomes in Patients With Severe Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND

In patients with severe coronary artery disease (CAD) requiring coronary revascularization, the prevalence of surgical ineligibility and its clinical effect on long-term outcomes remain unclear.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Among 15,939 patients with first coronary revascularization in the CREDO-Kyoto percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)/coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) registry cohort-2, we identified 3,982 patients with triple-vessel or left main disease (PCI: n=2,188, and CABG: n=1,794). Surgical ineligibility as documented in hospital charts was present in 142 (6.5%) of 2,188 PCI-patients, which was mainly related to comorbidities and advanced age. The cumulative 5-year incidence of the primary outcome measure (all-cause death/myocardial infarction/stroke) was much higher in PCI-patients with surgical ineligibility than in PCI-patients without surgical ineligibility and in CABG-patients (52.5%, 27.6%, and 24.0%, respectively, log-rank P<0.001). After adjusting for confounders, the excess risk of PCI-patients with surgical ineligibility relative to CABG-patients was substantial (hazard ratio [HR] 1.97, 95% CI 1.51-2.58, P<0.001), while the excess risk of PCI-patients without surgical ineligibility relative to CABG-patients was modest, but remained significant (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.19-1.59, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with severe CAD, PCI-patients with surgical ineligibility had worse long-term outcomes as compared with those without surgical ineligibility and CABG-patients.

A Meta-Analysis Comparing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Unprotected Left Main Disease

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the preferred revascularization strategy for unprotected left main disease (UPLMD). Multiple small-scale trials and registry data showed that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) is a noninferior strategy with a Class IIa American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association recommendation in patients with high surgical risk and favorable anatomy. However, 2 recent large-scale randomized trials showed conflicting evidence. We conducted a meta-analysis of the existing data to compare outcomes of PCI with DES versus CABG for UPLMD. Four randomized and 8 nonrandomized trials involving 10,284 patients were included. Primary end point was composite of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI) at 3 years or longer. Secondary end points were MACCE (Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebrovascular Events) and its individual components (death, stroke, MI, or repeat revascularization). Mantel-Haenszel random effects model was used to calculate combined odds ratio for outcomes. A separate analysis of randomized data was also performed. There was no significant difference in primary composite outcome between PCI and CABG. However, MACCE was significantly higher in PCI, primarily driven by significantly high repeat revascularization. A subgroup analysis stratified by Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score showed that MACCE and repeat revascularization were not significantly different between PCI and CABG in low to intermediate SYNTAX score (<33), whereas they were significantly higher in PCI with higher SYNTAX score. Thus, although CABG remains the preferred method of treatment in UPLMD, PCI with DES can be considered as a reasonable alternative in patients with favorable anatomy and high surgical risk.

Hybrid Coronary Revascularization has Improved Short-term Outcomes but Worse Mid-term Reintervention Rates Compared to CABG: A Propensity Matched Analysis

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated short-term outcomes and mid-term survival and reintervention of hybrid coronary revascularization versus conventional coronary artery bypass grafting using a propensity score matched cohort.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of patients undergoing surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease from 2007 to 2015 at a single institution. Patients were propensity matched 1:1 to receiving hybrid coronary revascularization or conventional bypass grafting by multivariate logistic regression on preoperative characteristics. Short-term outcomes were compared. Freedom from reintervention and death were assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis, log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

Propensity score matching selected 91 patients per group from 91 hybrid and 2601 conventionally revascularized patients. Hybrid revascularization occurred with surgery first in 56 (62%), percutaneous intervention first in 32 (35%), and simultaneously in 3 (3%) patients. Median intervals between interventions were 3 and 36 days for surgery first and percutaneous intervention first, respectively. Preoperative characteristics were similar. Patients undergoing hybrid revascularization had shorter postoperative length of stay (median = 4 vs 5 days, P < 0.001), less postoperative transfusion (13.2% vs 34.1%, P = 0.001), and respiratory failure (0% vs 6.6%, P = 0.03). They were more likely to be discharged home (93.4% vs 71.4%, P < 0.001), with no difference in 30-day mortality (P = 0.99), readmission (P = 0.23), or mid-term survival (P = 0.79). Hybrid revascularization was associated with earlier reintervention (P = 0.02). Hazard ratios for reintervention and patient mortality of hybrid coronary revascularization versus conventional revascularization were 3.60 (95% confidence interval = 1.16-11.20) and 1.17 (95% confidence interval = 0.37-3.72), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite having favorable short-term outcomes and similar survival, hybrid coronary revascularization may be associated with earlier reintervention compared with conventional techniques.

Meta-analysis study comparing percutaneous coronary intervention/drug eluting stent versus coronary artery bypass surgery of unprotected left main coronary artery disease: Clinical outcomes during short-term versus long-term (> 1 year) follow-up

BACKGROUND

Results on the safety and long-term efficacy of drug-eluting stent placement in unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCAD) compared with those of coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) remain inconsistent across randomized clinical trials and recent meta-analysis studies. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and safety over short- and long-term follow-ups by conducting a meta-analysis of large pooled data from randomized controlled trials and up-to-date observational studies.

METHODS

A systematic review of PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, and reference lists of related articles was performed for studies conducted in the drug-eluting stent era, to compare percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with CABG in ULMCAD. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, all-cause mortality, and revascularization after at least 1-year follow-up. In-hospital and 30-day clinical outcomes were considered secondary outcomes. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis of studies with ≥5 years follow-up was performed to test the sustainability of clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies were extracted with 21,832 patients (10,424 in PCI vs 11,408 in CABG). Pooled analysis demonstrated remarkable differences in long-term follow-up (≥1 year) MACCE (odds ratio [OR] 1.42, 95% CI 1.27-1.59), P < .00001), repeat revascularization (OR 3.00, 95% CI 2.41-3.73, P < .00001), and MI (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.14-1.53, P = .0002), favoring CABG over PCI. However, stroke risk was significantly lower in the PCI group. Subgroup analysis of studies with ≥5 years follow-up showed similar outcomes except for the noninferiority outcome of MACCE in the PCI arm. However, the PCI group proved good safety profile after a minimum of 30-day follow-up with lower MACCE outcome.

CONCLUSION

PCI for ULMCAD can be applied with attentiveness in carefully selected patients. MI and the need for revascularization remain drawbacks and areas of concern among previous studies. Nonetheless, it has been proven safe during short-term follow-up.

Long-term outcomes of bypass grafting versus drug-eluting stenting for left main coronary artery disease: Results from the IRIS-MAIN registry

There are limited data on comparative outcomes and its determinants following coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) for left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

A total of 3,504 consecutive patients with LMCAD treated with CABG (n=1,301) or PCI with DES (n=2,203) from the IRIS-MAIN registry were analyzed. The relative treatment effect of one strategy over another was assessed by propensity-score matching method. The primary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke.

RESULTS

Median follow-up duration was 4.7 years. In the matched cohort, both groups demonstrated a similar risk for the primary outcome (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.77-1.15; P=.54). Compared with CABG, PCI exhibited higher risks of myocardial infarction (HR: 2.11; 95% CI: 1.16-3.83; P=.01) and repeated revascularization (HR: 5.95; 95% CI: 3.94-8.98; P<.001). In the overall population, age, presence of chronic kidney disease, and low ejection fraction (<40%) were key clinical predictors of primary outcome regardless of the treatment strategy. However, factors deemed to be associated with perioperative morbidity were determinants of primary outcome in the CABG group, whereas those generally associated with the severity of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease were strong predictors in the PCI group.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with significant LMCAD, the long-term risk of the composite outcome of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was similar between CABG and PCI. Clinical variables that differentially predict adverse outcomes might be useful in triaging appropriate revascularization strategy.

Computing Methods for Composite Clinical Endpoints in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Post Hoc Analysis of the DELTA Registry

OBJECTIVES

The study sought to investigate the impact of different computing methods for composite endpoints other than time-to-event (TTE) statistics in a large, multicenter registry of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease.

BACKGROUND

TTE statistics for composite outcome measures used in ULMCA studies consider only the first event, and all the contributory outcomes are handled as if of equal importance.

METHODS

The TTE, Andersen-Gill, win ratio (WR), competing risk, and weighted composite endpoint (WCE) computing methods were applied to ULMCA patients revascularized by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) at 14 international centers.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 1,295 days (interquartile range: 928 to 1,713 days), all analyses showed no difference in combinations of death, myocardial infarction, and cerebrovascular accident between PCI and CABG. When target vessel revascularization was incorporated in the composite endpoint, the TTE (p = 0.03), Andersen-Gill (p = 0.04), WR (p = 0.025), and competing risk (p < 0.001) computing methods showed CABG to be significantly superior to PCI in the analysis of 1,204 propensity-matched patients, whereas incorporating the clinical relevance of the component endpoints using WCE resulted in marked attenuation of the treatment effect of CABG, with loss of significance for the difference between revascularization strategies (p = 0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

In a large study of ULMCA revascularization, incorporating the clinical relevance of the individual outcomes resulted in sensibly different findings as compared with the conventional TTE approach. In particular, using the WCE computing method, PCI and CABG were no longer significantly different with respect to the composite of death, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, or target vessel revascularization at a median of 3 years.

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus cardiac bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease: A trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Several updated meta-analyses comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery disease (LM CAD) have been published recently. However, the risk of false-positive results could be high in conventional updated meta-analyses due to repetitive testing of accumulating data. Therefore, we compared these treatment approaches via trial sequential analysis (TSA).

METHODS

The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or subgroups of RCTs comparing PCI and CABG in patients with LM CAD. The primary outcome was major cardiac and cerebrovascular adverse events (MACCE). TSA was used to confirm the conclusions derived from conventional meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Six RCTs with 4700 patients were included. PCI was associated with a greater risk of MACCE compared with CABG (pooled relative risk [RR] 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.40, P = .008). In addition, PCI resulted in a significantly higher risk of revascularization than CABG (pooled RR 1.61, 95% CI: 1.33-1.95, P < .0001). TSA provided firm evidence for the reduction of MACCE and revascularization with CABG compared with PCI (cumulative z-curve crossed the monitoring boundary). In the subgroup analysis, CABG was better than PCI in patients with SYNTAX score >32 (pooled RR 1.41, 95% CI: 1.12-1.76, P = .003), which was confirmed by the TSA. There was no difference in patients with a SYNTAX score from 0 to 32.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with LM CAD, CABG may be better than PCI for reducing MACCE due to a reduced risk of revascularization. CABG remains the first choice for LM CAD patients with high anatomic complexity, while PCI could be an alternative for those with low-to-moderate anatomic complexity.

Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

Few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies had shown acceptable short-term efficacy and safety of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) compared with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in selected patients with left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD). We aimed to evaluate long-term outcomes of PCI using DES compared with CABG in patients with LMCAD. On November 1, 2016, we searched available databases for published RCTs directly comparing DES PCI with CABG in patients with LMCAD. Odds ratios (ORs) were used as the metric of choice for treatment effects using a random-effects model. I-squared index was used to assess heterogeneity across trials. Prespecified end points were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and repeat revascularization at maximal available follow-up. We identified 5 RCTs including a total of 4,595 patients, with a median follow-up of 60 months. The risk of all-cause mortality (OR 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76 to 1.34) and cardiovascular mortality (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.42) were comparable between PCI with DES and CABG. Similarly, there were no statistically significant differences between PCI with DES and CABG for MI (OR 1.45; 95% CI 0.87 to 2.40) and stroke (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.38 to 1.98). Conversely, repeat revascularization was significantly higher with PCI compared with CABG (OR 1.82; 95% CI 1.51 to 2.21). In conclusion, in patients with LMCAD, PCI with DES appears to be a viable alternative to CABG at long-term follow-up, with similar risks of ischemic adverse events (mortality, MI, and stroke) but a higher risk of repeat revascularization.

Worse clinical outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention with a high SYNTAX score: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The synergy between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score is an angiographic tool which is used to determine the complexity of coronary artery disease (CAD). We aimed to compare PCI versus coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) in patients with a high SYNTAX score in order to confirm with evidence whether the former is really association with worse clinical outcomes.

METHODS

The National database of medical research articles (MEDLINE/PubMed), EMBASE database, and the Cochrane library were searched for publications comparing PCI versus CABG in patients with a high SYNTAX score, respectively. Death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, repeated revascularization, and a combined outcome death/stroke/MI were considered as the clinical endpoints. RevMan software was used to analyze the data, whereby odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used as the statistical parameters.

RESULTS

A total number of 1074 patients were included (455 patients with a high SYNTAX score were classified in the PCI group and 619 other patients with a high SYNTAX score were classified in the CABG group). A SYNTAX score cut-off value of ≥33 was considered relevant. Compared with CABG, mortality was significantly higher with a high SYNTAX score following PCI with OR: 1.79, 95% CI: 1.18 to 2.70; P = .006, I = 0%. The combined outcome death/stroke/MI was also significantly higher following PCI with a high SYNTAX score, with OR: 1.69, 95% CI: 1.24 to 2.30; P = .0009, I = 0%. In addition, PCI was also associated with significantly higher MI and repeated revascularization when compared with CABG, with OR: 3.72, 95% CI: 1.75 to 7.89; P = .0006, I = 0% and OR: 4.33, 95% CI: 1.71 to 10.94; P = .002, I = 77%, respectively. However, stroke was not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with CABG, worse clinical outcomes were observed following PCI in patients with a high SYNTAX score, confirming with evidence, published clinical literatures. Therefore, CABG should be recommended to CAD patients who have been allotted a high SYNTAX score.

Meta-Analysis of Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Narrowing

Patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease are increasingly treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES); however, the benefits of DES compared with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in ULMCA remain controversial. This meta-analysis evaluated the effects of PCI with DES compared with CABG for the treatment of ULMCA stenosis. Databases were searched through November 30, 2016. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DES with PCI versus CABG for ULMCA stenosis were identified. We calculated summary odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs with the random-effects model. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as a composite of death from any cause, stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI). The analysis included 4,612 patients from 5 RCTs. Compared with CABG, patients assigned to PCI had a similar rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.43), all-cause mortality (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.35), cardiovascular death (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.45), stroke (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.76), and MI (OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.47). The risk of any repeat revascularization was significantly greater in the PCI group than that in the CABG group (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.53 to 2.24). In conclusion, our meta-analysis of RCTs suggest that PCI with DES results in comparable mortality, stroke, and MI compared with CABG for revascularization of ULMCA stenosis, with PCI associated with higher rates of repeat revascularization.

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.

Percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass grafting in treatment of unprotected left main stenosis (NOBLE): a prospective, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the standard treatment for revascularisation in patients with left main coronary artery disease, but use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for this indication is increasing. We aimed to compare PCI and CABG for treatment of left main coronary artery disease.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial, patients with left main coronary artery disease were enrolled in 36 centres in northern Europe and randomised 1:1 to treatment with PCI or CABG. Eligible patients had stable angina pectoris, unstable angina pectoris, or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Exclusion criteria were ST-elevation myocardial infarction within 24 h, being considered too high risk for CABG or PCI, or expected survival of less than 1 year. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE), a composite of all-cause mortality, non-procedural myocardial infarction, any repeat coronary revascularisation, and stroke. Non-inferiority of PCI to CABG required the lower end of the 95% CI not to exceed a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·35 after up to 5 years of follow-up. The intention-to-treat principle was used in the analysis if not specified otherwise. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, number NCT01496651.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 9, 2008, and Jan 21, 2015, 1201 patients were randomly assigned, 598 to PCI and 603 to CABG, and 592 in each group entered analysis by intention to treat. Kaplan-Meier 5 year estimates of MACCE were 29% for PCI (121 events) and 19% for CABG (81 events), HR 1·48 (95% CI 1·11-1·96), exceeding the limit for non-inferiority, and CABG was significantly better than PCI (p=0·0066). As-treated estimates were 28% versus 19% (1·55, 1·18-2·04, p=0·0015). Comparing PCI with CABG, 5 year estimates were 12% versus 9% (1·07, 0·67-1·72, p=0·77) for all-cause mortality, 7% versus 2% (2·88, 1·40-5·90, p=0·0040) for non-procedural myocardial infarction, 16% versus 10% (1·50, 1·04-2·17, p=0·032) for any revascularisation, and 5% versus 2% (2·25, 0·93-5·48, p=0·073) for stroke.

INTERPRETATION

The findings of this study suggest that CABG might be better than PCI for treatment of left main stem coronary artery disease.

FUNDING

Biosensors, Aarhus University Hospital, and participating sites.

Additive Value of Heart Rate Variability in Predicting Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease Beyond Framingham Risk

BACKGROUND

Heart rate variability (HRV) is usually reduced in patients with CAD. We therefore investigated whether reduced HRV is predictive of angiographic CAD beyond Framingham risk in patients with stable angina.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 514 patients (age, 66.1 ± 14.3 years, 358 men) were enrolled. Holter ECG was performed before catheterization, and 24-h HRV was analyzed in both the frequency domain (VLF, LF, HF and total power) and the time domain (SDNN, SDANN, RMSSD and pNN20). Angiographic CAD was defined as ≥ 50% diameter reduction of 1 or more coronary arteries. On coronary angiography 203 patients (39.6%) had angiographic CAD. Patients with CAD had significantly higher Framingham risk and lower HRV according to both frequency and time domain parameters. After controlling for age, gender, heart rate, SBP, renal function, lipids and Framingham risk, reduced HRV indices remained predictors of CAD (OR, 95% CI for LF, HF, SDNN, RMSSD and pNN20: 0.81, 0.66-0.99; 0.77, 0.63-0.94; 0.75, 0.59-0.96; 0.72, 0.58-0.88; and 0.76, 0.62-0.94, respectively). On subgroup analysis, HRV parameters appeared to be predictive of CAD only in subjects with high Framingham risk or diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

Reduced HRV is predictive of CAD in patients with stable angina, independent of traditional risk factors and Framingham risk. The predictive value of HRV may be relevant only in subjects with high Framingham risk or diabetes.

Serum VEGF Predicts Worse Clinical Outcome of Patients with Coronary Heart Disease After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Therapy

Background

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an effective treatment for coronary heart disease (CHD) patients. However, patients after PCI treatment often have ischemic events that result in poor prognosis. Our study aimed to investigate the effects of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) level on the prognosis of CHD patients.

Material/Methods

We enrolled 114 CHD patients in the study. Serum VEGF level was measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, and Hs-CRP were also tested in patients. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to the level of VEGF. Kaplan-Meier curve was used to observe the differences in survival situation of patients of the 2 groups. Cox regression analysis was conducted to judge whether VEGF was an independent biomarker for prognosis in CHD.

Results

We included 104 patients for survival analysis. VEGF level in CHD patients was significantly lower than that of healthy individuals (P<0.05). In the analysis of basic information, we found differences in sex distribution and hypertension between groups (P<0.05 for both). Kaplan-Meier curve indicated that patients with low expression of VEGF presented with poor prognosis. The mortality rate of the low-expression group was 37.71%, higher than that of the high-expression group (14.3%). Cox analysis suggested that VEGF could serve as a biomarker for prognosis in CHD (HR: 3.014, P: 0.019).

Conclusions

Low level of VEGF may predict poor clinical outcome of CHD patients after PCI treatment.