Percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease: a focus on physiology

Predicting long-term prognosis after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a prospective nested case-control analysis for county-level health services

Purpose

We aimed to establish and authenticate a clinical prognostic nomogram for predicting long-term Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACEs) among high-risk patients who have undergone Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) in county-level health service.

Patients and methods

This prospective study included Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) patients treated with PCI at six county-level hospitals between September 2018 and August 2019, selected from both the original training set and external validation set. Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression techniques and logistic regression were used to assess potential risk factors and construct a risk predictive nomogram. Additionally, the potential non-linear relationships between continuous variables were tested using Restricted Cubic Splines (RCS). The performance of the nomogram was evaluated based on the Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, Calibration Curve, Decision Curve Analysis (DCA), and Clinical Impact Curve (CIC).

Results

The original training set and external validation set comprised 520 and 1,061 patients, respectively. The final nomogram was developed using nine clinical variables: Age, Killip functional classification III-IV, Hypertension, Hyperhomocysteinemia, Heart failure, Number of stents, Multivessel disease, Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol, and Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction. The AUC of the nomogram was 0.79 and 0.75 in the training set and external validation set, respectively. The DCA and CIC validated the clinical value of the constructed prognostic nomogram.

Conclusion

We developed and validated a prognostic nomogram for predicting the probability of 3-year MACEs in ACS patients who underwent PCI at county-level hospitals. The nomogram could provide a precise risk assessment for secondary prevention in ACS patients receiving PCI.

Association of coronary artery dominance and mortality rate and complications in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Background

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the treatment of choice for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Effect of coronary artery dominance on the patients' outcome following primary PCI (PPCI) is not fully investigated. We investigated the association of coronary artery dominance with complications and 1-year mortality rate of PPCI.

Materials and Methods

In this retrospective study, patients with STEMI treated with PPCI from March 2016 to February 2018 were divided into three groups based on their coronary dominancy: left dominance (LD), right dominance (RD), and codominant. Demographic characteristics, medical history, results of physical examination, electrocardiography, angiography, and echocardiography were compared between the groups.

Results

Of 491 patients included in this study, 34 patients (7%) were LD and 22 patients (4.5%) were codominant. Accordingly, 54 propensity-matched RD patients were included in the analysis. The demographics and comorbidities of the three groups were not different (P > 0.05); however, all patients in the RD group had thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) 3, while five patients in the LD and five patients in the codominant group had a TIMI ≤2 (P = 0.006). At admission, the median left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was highest in RD patients and lowest in LD and codominant patients (34%, P = 0.009). There was no difference in terms of success or complications of PCI, in-hospital, and 1-year mortality rate (P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Patients with left coronary artery dominance had a higher value of indicators of worse outcomes, such as lower LVEF and TIMI ≤ 2, compared with RD patients, but not different rates of success or complications of PCI, in-hospital, and 1-year mortality. This finding may suggest that interventionists should prepare themselves with protective measures for no-reflow and slow-flow phenomenon and also mechanical circulatory support before performing PPCI in LD patients.