Is Complete Revascularisation Mandated for all Patients with Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease?

Advancements in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Techniques: A Comprehensive Literature Review of Mixed Studies and Practice Guidelines

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a widely used therapy for coronary artery disease (CAD), but it carries risks and complications. Adhering to evidence-based practice guidelines is crucial for optimal outcomes. This review compares the recommendations of the 2021 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (ACC/AHA/SCAI) and 2018 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines for coronary artery revascularization and discusses emerging trends and novel devices in PCI. A comprehensive literature review of mixed studies, clinical trials, and guidelines was conducted. Intravascular imaging, including intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography, for stent optimization, is also recommended when feasible. However, differences reflecting variations in evidence quality interpretation and applicability were identified. Furthermore, novel devices and technologies with the potential for improving outcomes were highlighted, but their safety and efficacy compared to standard-of-care techniques require further evaluation through extensive randomized trials. Clinicians should stay updated on advancements and personalize treatment decisions based on individual patient factors. Future research should address evidence gaps and barriers to adopting innovative devices and techniques. This review provides recommendations for clinical practice, emphasizing the need to remain current with the evolving landscape of PCI to optimize patient outcomes. The discoveries provide valuable counsel for the deliberation of clinical interventions and prospective inquiries within the realm of interventional cardiology. Overall, the review underscores the importance of evidence-based practice and ongoing advancements in PCI for CAD management.

Evaluation of Oxidative Status in Elderly Patients with Multiple Cerebral Infarctions and Multiple Chronic Total Coronary Occlusions

Background. Oxidative stress plays a key role in atherosclerosis. Acting via high level of reactive oxygen species, an increase of oxidative stress is involved in the pathogenesis and progression of atherosclerostic stenosis or occlusion of arteries. Oxidative stress leads to an accumulation of oxidized low-density lipoprotein, which plays important roles in steno-occlusion of cerebral and coronary arteries. However, the exact reasons for multiple cerebral and coronary artery steno-occlusion in elderly patients remain unclear. The aim was to evaluate the effects of imbalance of oxidative/antioxidative status on concomitant multiple brain infarcts and multiple chronic total coronary occlusions in elderly patients. Methods. We measured the circulating levels of malondialdehyde (MDA), reactive oxygen species (ROS), thiobarbituric acid reactive substance (TBARS), advanced oxidation protein products (AOPP), superoxide dismutase 1 (SOD 1), superoxide dismutase 2 (SOD 2), superoxide dismutase 3 (SOD 3), and paraoxonase 1 (PON 1) in patients with concomitant multiple cerebral infarcts and multiple chronic total coronary occlusions. Results. Circulating levels of oxidative stress markers (MDA, ROS, TBARS, and AOPP) were increased ( $P<0.001$ ) and antioxidative stress markers (SOD 1, SOD 2, SOD 3, and PON 1) were decreased ( $P<0.001$ ) in elderly patients with concomitant multiple brain infarcts and multiple chronic total coronary occlusions. Conclusions. The findings suggested that the imbalance of oxidative/antioxidative status may be associated with multiple cerebral infarcts and multiple chronic total coronary occlusions and may contribute to the development of concomitant multiple brain infarcts and multiple chronic total coronary occlusions in elderly patients.

Is the Use of BIMA in CABG Sub-Optimal? A Review of the Current Clinical and Economic Evidence Including Innovative Approaches to the Management of Mediastinitis

Bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA) in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has traditionally been limited. This review looks at the recent outcome data on BIMA in CABG focusing on the management of risk factors for mediastinitis, one of the potential barriers for more extensive BIMA utilization. A combination of pre-, intra- and postoperative strategies are essential to reduce mediastinitis. Limited data indicate that the incidence of mediastinitis can be reduced using closed incision negative-pressure wound therapy as a part of these strategies with the possibility of offering patients best treatment options by extending BIMA to those with a higher risk of mediastinitis. Recent economic data imply that the technology may challenge the current low uptake of BIMA by reducing the short-term cost differentials between single internal mammary artery and BIMA. Given that most published randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses of observational long-term outcome data favor BIMA, if short-term complications of BIMA including mediastinitis can be controlled adequately, there may be opportunities for more extensive use of BIMA leading to improved long-term outcomes. An ongoing study looking at BIMA in high-risk patients may provide evidence to support the hypothesis that mediastinitis should not be a factor in limiting the use of BIMA in CABG.

Risk of heart failure following drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The association between implanted stent types and heart failure in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) remains unknown. The current study aimed to investigate whether the implantation of a newer-generation drug-eluting stent (NG-DES) compared with that of a bare-metal stent (BMS) in patients with NSTEMI who receive an undefined duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) reduces the risk of hospitalization for heart failure (HHF).

METHODS

In this nationwide, population-based retrospective cohort study, propensity score matching was used on the Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database to select 8,644 pairs of patients with NSTEMI and similar baseline characteristics receiving NG-DES or BMS implantation between January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2016. A competing risk model was constructed to evaluate the risk of HHF in the NG-DES and BMS groups. Death was considered a competing risk.

RESULTS

Rates of cumulative incidence competing risk for HHF at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5-year follow-ups were lower in the NG-DES group (4.11%, 5.63%, 6.72%, 7.65%, and 8.89%, respectively) than in the BMS group (5.89%, 7.81%, 9.25%, 10.8%, and 11.9%, respectively). After adjustment for all clinical variables, NG-DES implantation was associated with a lower risk of HHF than BMS implantation after 5 years, with an adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio of 0.71 (95% CI = 0.64-0.79, p < 0.001). These results are in agreement with those of patients who received DAPT for >6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

NG-DESs may reduce HHF risk in patients with NSTEMI who receive an undefined duration of DAPT.

Debate of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in a Multimorbidity Patient with Complex Coronary Lesions

Background

While complete revascularization in coronary artery disease is of high priority, the method of implementation in patients with complex coronary lesions and multiple comorbidities is not directed by published guidelines. Case Presentation. A 53-year-old female with a chronic total occlusion of the right coronary artery and a bifurcation lesion of the left anterior descending artery and the first diagonal branch, presented with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction. Her past medical history concerned thymectomy and prior chest radiation for thymoma, myasthenia gravis, peripheral artery disease, and cervical cancer treated with surgery and radiation. Although SYNTAX score II favored surgical revascularization, the interventional pathway was finally successfully followed. However, it was complicated with vessel perforation and tamponade managed with pericardiocentesis.

Conclusion

Comorbidities are not all involved in common risk models and require individualization until more evidence comes to light.

Meta-analysis Comparing Multivessel Versus Culprit Coronary Arterial Revascularization for Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes

We present a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing efficacy and safety outcomes between single procedure multivessel revascularization (MVR) and culprit vessel only revascularization in patients presenting with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). NSTE-ACS is the most common form of acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and multivessel disease is common. There is no consensus on the most efficacious single procedure revascularization strategy for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention not meeting coronary artery bypass grafting criteria. Studies in PubMed and EMBASE databases were systematically reviewed, and 15 studies met criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Baseline characteristics between the groups were similar. A random effects model was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity of studies was assessed using Cochrane's Q and Higgins I² tests. For short-term outcomes, patients who underwent MVR had higher rates of major adverse cardiac events (OR 1.14; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.29; p = 0.03); and stroke (OR 1.94; 95% CI 1.01 to 3.72; p = 0.05), but lower rates of urgent or emergent coronary artery bypass grafting (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.43; p <0.00001). In the long-term, MVR patients had less frequent major adverse cardiac events (OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.61-0.93; p = 0.009), all-cause death (OR 0.83; 95% CI 0.71 to 0.97; p = 0.03), and repeat revascularization, (OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.90; p = 0.01). MVR following NSTE-ACS was associated with higher short-term risk, but long-term benefit. In conclusion, these results support the use of single procedure multivessel revascularization for NSTE-ACS patients who are suitable candidates at the time of percutaneous coronary intervention.