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

Impact of Complete or Incomplete Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Disease: The Extended PRECOMBAT Study

Background

Whether complete revascularization (CR) or incomplete revascularization (IR) may affect long-term outcomes after PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease is unclear.

Objectives

The authors sought to assess the impact of CR or IR on 10-year outcomes after PCI or CABG for LMCA disease.

Methods

In the PRECOMBAT (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) 10-year extended study, the authors evaluated the effect of PCI and CABG on long-term outcomes according to completeness of revascularization. The primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (composite of mortality from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization).

Results

Among 600 randomized patients (PCI, n = 300 and CABG, n = 300), 416 patients (69.3%) had CR and 184 (30.7%) had IR; 68.3% of PCI patients and 70.3% of CABG patients underwent CR, respectively. The 10-year MACCE rates were not significantly different between PCI and CABG among patients with CR (27.8% vs 25.1%, respectively; adjusted HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 0.81-1.73) and among those with IR (31.6% vs 21.3%, respectively; adjusted HR: 1.64; 95% CI: 0.92-2.92) (P for interaction = 0.35). There was also no significant interaction between the status of CR and the relative effect of PCI and CABG on all-cause mortality, serious composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and repeat revascularization.

Conclusions

In this 10-year follow-up of PRECOMBAT, the authors found no significant difference between PCI and CABG in the rates of MACCE and all-cause mortality according to CR or IR status. (Ten-Year Outcomes of PRE-COMBAT Trial [PRECOMBAT], NCT03871127; PREmier of Randomized COMparison of Bypass Surgery Versus AngioplasTy Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease [PRECOMBAT], NCT00422968).

One-year outcomes of polymer-free amphilimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents in patients with diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus (DM) and cardiovascular diseases often co-exist. Today, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the preferred revascularization procedure for majority of patients with coronary artery disease. Polymer-free amphilimus-eluting stents (AES) represent a novel elution technology in the current era of drug-eluting stents. In this analysis, we aimed to systematically compare the cardiovascular outcomes which are associated with polymer-free amphilimus-eluting stents (AES) versus the durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) for the treatment of patients with DM.

METHODS

Http://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Cochrane database and Google Scholar were searched for publications comparing polymer-free AES versus durable polymer ZES in patients with DM. Selective cardiovascular outcomes were assessed. Statistical analysis was carried out by the latest version of the RevMan software. Risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to represent the data analysis.

RESULTS

Four studies with a total number of 1795 participants with DM whereby 912 patients were assigned to be revascularized by the polymer-free AES and 883 patients were assigned to be revascularized by the durable polymer ZES were included in this analysis. In patients with DM, at one year, polymer-free AES were associated with significantly lower risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) (RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.54-0.88; P = 0.002) and target lesion failure (TLF) (RR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.48-0.91; P = 0.01) compared to durable polymer ZES. However, there was no significant change in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.51-1.22; P = 0.28), cardiac death and the other cardiovascular outcomes. Similar risk of total stent thrombosis (RR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.60-2.13; P = 0.70), including definite stent thrombosis (RR: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.38-3.31; P = 0.84), probable stent thrombosis (RR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.37-2.09; P = 0.76), possible stent thrombosis (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.50-2.87; P = 0.69) and late stent thrombosis (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.17-5.72; P = 1.00) as between polymer-free AES and durable polymer ZES in patients with DM.

CONCLUSIONS

At 1 year follow-up, polymer-free AES were associated with significantly lower MACEs and TLF compared to durable polymer ZES in these patients with DM, without any increase in mortality, stent thrombosis and other cardiovascular outcomes. However, this analysis is only based on a follow-up time period of one year, therefore, future research should focus on the long term follow-up time period.

Left Main Disease

Traditionally, the treatment of left main coronary artery disease is recommended coronary artery bypass grafting because of its superior long-term outcomes compared with medical treatment and plain old balloon angioplasty. However, improvement of percutaneous coronary intervention technique and introduction of drug-eluting stent led to change of treatment strategy of left main coronary artery disease through cumulative data for revascularization that based on clinical evidence.

Time-Dependent Impact of Sex on the Long-Term Outcomes After Left Main Revascularization

Background There are still limited data about the differential effect of sex on long-term outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery disease. This extended follow-up study of the MAIN-COMPARE (Ten-Year Outcomes of Stents Versus Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) registry evaluated clinical outcomes beyond 10 years. Methods and Results Of 2240 patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease (PCI=1102 and CABG=1138), all-cause mortality, the composite of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or stroke, and target vessel revascularization were separately evaluated in both sexes. Of 2240 patients, 631 (28.2%) were women and 1609 (71.8%) were men. Women had lower 10-year incidences of death and serious composite outcomes than men. The adjusted 10-year risks of adverse outcomes were similar in men. However, the adjusted 10-year risks were different according to a prespecified period in women. In the short-term (0-1 year) period, PCI had a significantly lower risk for serious composite outcomes (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.19-0.91; P=0.03) compared with CABG. The adjusted risks for death and serious composite outcomes were significantly higher after PCI than after CABG, during the midterm (1-5 years) period (death; adjusted HR, 3.99; 95% CI, 2.01-7.92; P<0.001 and composite outcome; adjusted HR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.59-5.39; P=0.001). Beyond 5 years, adjusted risks were similar after PCI and CABG in women. Conclusions In this 10-year extended follow-up study of patients undergoing left main coronary artery revascularization, we observed a time-dependent impact of sex on the long-term outcomes after PCI and CABG, especially in women, with significant interactions. However, these results warrant confirmation on larger series of studies. Registration URl: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02791412.

Ten-year Outcomes After Drug-Eluting Stents or Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Disease in Patients With and Without Diabetes Mellitus: The PRECOMBAT Extended Follow-Up Study

Background

Several trials reported differential outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug‐eluting stents (DES) and coronary‐artery bypass grafting (CABG) for multivessel coronary disease according to the presence of diabetes mellitus (DM). However, it is not well recognized how DM status affects very‐long‐term (10‐year) outcomes after DES and CABG for left main coronary artery disease.

Methods and Results

In the PRECOMBAT (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty using Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) trial, patients with LMCA were randomly assigned to undergo PCI with sirolimus‐eluting stents (n=300) or CABG (n=300). The primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE; a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia‐driven target‐vessel revascularization). Outcomes were examined in patients with (n=192) and without (n=408) medically treated diabetes. The follow‐up was extended to at least 10 years for all patients (median, 11.3 years). The 10‐year rates of MACCE were not significantly different between DES and CABG in patients with DM (36.3% versus 26.7%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 1.35; 95% CI, 0.83–2.19; P=0.23) and without DM (25.3% versus 22.9%, respectively; HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.79–1.67; P=0.48) (P‐for‐interaction=0.48). There were no significant between‐group differences in composite of death, MI, or stroke, and all‐cause mortality, regardless of DM status. TVR rates were consistently higher after DES than CABG.

Conclusions

In this 10‐year extended follow‐up of PRECOMBAT, we found no significant difference between DES and CABG with respect to the incidences of MACCE, serious composite outcome, and all‐cause mortality in patients with and without DM with LMCA disease. However, owing to the limited number of patients and no adjustment for multiple testing, overall findings should be considered hypothesis‐generating, highlighting the need for further research.

Registration

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03871127 and NCT00422968.

Role of IVUS in the rectification of angiographically judged ramus intermedius and its clinical significance

Background

Due to the technical limitations of coronary artery angiography (CAG), ramus intermedius (RI) is sometimes difficult to distinguish from a high-origin obtuse marginal branch or a high-origin diagonal branch. This study sought to investigate the role of intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) in the rectification of angiographically judged RI.

Methods

This study retrospectively analyzed 165 patients who were reported to have an RI based on CAG and underwent IVUS implementation from 02/01/2009 to 31/12/2019 in Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University. Taking IVUS as the gold standard, we calculated the accuracy of RI identification by CAG and evaluated the impact of RI on revascularization strategy.

Results

Among the 165 patients, 89 patients (54%) were demonstrated to have an RI on IVUS (IVUS-RI), 32 patients (19%) were identified to have a high-origin diagonal branch on IVUS (IVUS-h-D), and 44 patients (27%) had an actual high-origin obtuse marginal artery on IVUS (IVUS-h-OM). Among 84 patients who underwent one-stent crossover stenting because of left main furcation lesions (48 patients in the IVUS-RI group, 12 patients in the IVUS-h-D group, and 24 in the IVUS-h-OM group), 14.6% of patients in the IVUS-RI group, 33.3% in the IVUS-h-D group and 0% in the IVUS-h-OM group had CAG-RI compromise (P = 0.02), which was defined as severe stenosis of the RI ostium (> 75%) or significant RI flow impairment (TIMI < 3).

Conclusions

Only 54% of CAG-RIs were confirmed by IVUS, which indicates the necessity of preintervention IVUS to distinguish real RIs from other branches in LM furcation lesions.

Comparison of simple versus complex stenting in patients with true distal left main bifurcation lesions

INTRODUCTION

Distal left main (LM) bifurcation disease is one of the most challenging lesion subsets for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and optimal stenting strategy for such complex lesions is still debated. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes following single versus dual stenting for true distal LM bifurcation lesions.

METHODS

Patients with true distal LM bifurcation lesions (type 1,1,1 or 0,1,1: both left anterior descending and circumflex artery >2.5 mm diameter) receiving PCI with drug-eluting stents (DES) from two large clinical registries were evaluated. The primary outcome was target-lesion failure (TLF), defined as a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction (MI), or target-lesion revascularization (TLR). Outcomes were compared with the use of propensity scores and inverse probability-weighting adjustment to reduce treatment selection bias.

RESULTS

Among 1,002 patients undergoing true distal LM PCI, 440 (43.9%) and 562 (56.1%) were treated with single and dual stents, respectively. The TLF rates at 3 year was 20.3% in the single-stent group and 24.1% in the dual-stenting group (log-rank p = 0.18). The adjusted risk for TLF did not differ significantly between two groups (hazard ratio [HR] with dual-stent vs. single-stent: 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95-1.71). The adjusted risks for death, MI, repeat revascularization, or stent thrombosis were also similar between the single- and dual-stenting groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing PCI for true distal LM disease, single- and dual-stent strategies showed a similar adjusted risk of TLF at 3 years. Our findings should be confirmed or refuted through large, randomized clinical trials.

Ten-Year Outcomes After Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Left Main Coronary Disease

Background:

Long-term comparative outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents and coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery disease are highly debated.

Methods:

In the PRECOMBAT trial (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease), patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to undergo PCI with sirolimus-eluting stents (n=300) or CABG (n=300) in 13 hospitals in Korea from April 2004 to August 2009. The follow-up was extended to at least 10 years for all patients (median, 11.3 years). The primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization).

Results:

At 10 years, a primary outcome event occurred in 29.8% of the PCI group and in 24.7% of the CABG group (hazard ratio [HR] with PCI vs CABG, 1.25 [95% CI, 0.93–1.69]). The 10-year incidence of the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (18.2% vs 17.5%; HR 1.00 [95% CI, 0.70–1.44]) and all-cause mortality (14.5% vs 13.8%; HR 1.13 [95% CI, 0.75–1.70]) were not significantly different between the PCI and CABG groups. Ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization was more frequent after PCI than after CABG (16.1% vs 8.0%; HR 1.98 [95% CI, 1.21–3.21).

Conclusions:

Ten-year follow-up of the PRECOMBAT trial of patients with left main coronary artery disease randomized to PCI or CABG did not demonstrate significant difference in the incidence of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events. Because the study was underpowered, the results should be considered hypothesis-generating, highlighting the need for further research.

Registration:

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifiers: NCT03871127 and NCT00422968.

Rates and Independent Correlates of 10-Year Major Adverse Events and Mortality in Patients Undergoing Left Main Coronary Arterial Revascularization

Patients who underwent myocardial revascularization for significant left main coronary artery disease (LMCA) are at high risks of ischemic events and death during follow-up. We sought to determine the independent correlates for very long-term outcomes after LMCA revascularization, which would be clinical value for risk stratification in such high-risk patients. The 10-year rates of clinical outcomes and independent correlates of adverse events were evaluated in 2,240 patients with LMCA disease in the MAIN-COMPARE registry, including 1,102 patients who underwent stenting and 1,138 who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting. The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or stroke. Secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and target-vessel revascularization (TVR). The 10-year rates of the primary composite outcome, all-cause mortality, and TVR were 24.7%, 22.2%, and 13.6%, respectively. Age >65 years, diabetes, previous heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, peripheral arterial disease, chronic renal failure, atrial fibrillation, ejection fraction <40%, and distal LMCA bifurcation disease were independent correlates of the primary outcome in the overall population. Several clinical and anatomic parameters were also identified as independent correlates of all-cause death and TVR. Interaction analysis showed no heterogeneities of the effects of variables depending on revascularization type. These clinical descriptors can assist clinicians in identifying high-risk patients within the broad range of risk for patients who underwent LMCA revascularization.

The EXCEL Trial: The Surgeons' Perspective

There have been several investigations comparing the efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting surgery for treatment of left main stem disease. This includes the Evaluation of XIENCE versus Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularizaton (EXCEL) trial, which has garnered significant controversy surrounding its experimental design and reporting of its results. The authors review the methodology, results, caveats and statements on the EXCEL trial. They also review the other trials in the management of left main stem disease comparing percutaneous coronary intervention with coronary artery bypass grafting, as well as the SYNTAX score and its role in future guidelines for revascularisation. These findings have significant implications for current practice, influencing the growing role for multidisciplinary team meeting and allowing clinicians and patients to make the right choice.

Proximal Left Anterior Descending Artery Treatment Using a Bioresorbable Polymer Coating Sirolimus-Eluting Stent: Real-World Outcomes From the Multicenter Prospective e-Ultimaster Registry

Background Guidelines recommend heart team discussion and coronary artery bypass graft consideration in patients with proximal left anterior descending (LAD) artery stenosis. Evidence suggests that outcomes of proximal LAD angioplasty might not differ from treatment of nonproximal LAD locations. We aim to determine clinical outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the proximal LAD segment in comparison with nonproximal LAD angioplasty, using a thin-strut drug-eluting stent. Methods and Results In this analysis of the e-Ultimaster registry, patients undergoing angioplasty in the proximal LAD territory were compared with those treated in nonproximal LAD locations. Multivariate analysis and propensity score were used to adjust for differences among the groups. The primary outcome was target lesion failure: a composite of cardiac death, target-lesion-related myocardial infarction, and/or clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up. Of the 17 805 patients (mean age, 64.2±11; 76% male), 5452 (30.6%) underwent proximal LAD and 12 353 (69.4%) nonproximal LAD percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients in the proximal LAD group had more multivessel disease (48.7% versus 43.5%; P<0.001) and 2-fold more bifurcations lesions (18.8% versus 9.2%; P<0.0001). After propensity-weighted adjustment, target lesion failure did not differ between the groups (3.3% versus 2.9%; P=0.17 for proximal LAD versus nonproximal LAD angioplasty, respectively). In multivariate analysis, proximal LAD treatment was not an independent predictor of target lesion failure (odds ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.88-1.31; P=0.48). Conclusions At 1-year follow-up, patients had similar clinical outcomes independent of stenting location, questioning whether proximal LAD treatment should be regarded differently from stenting in any other coronary artery territory.