[Long-term prognosis of drug eluting stents implantation in elderly patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease]

Objective: To analyze the clinical characteristics and long-term prognosis of implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES) for elderly patients with unprotected left main artery (ULM) disease. Methods: A total of 414 patients (327 males and 87 females) who underwent DES implantation were enrolled in the Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital from January 2005 to March 2010, with a mean age of (61.5±10.7) years old. The patients were divided into two groups according to age: 300 cases in the group of age <70 years old, and 114 cases in the group of age ≥70 years old. The clinical characteristics and long-term prognosis of two groups were compared. Results: In the group of age ≥ 70 years old, the proportion of female was higher (31.6% vs 17.0%, P=0.001) and the incidence of chronic total occlusion (CTO) (P=0.020), hypertension (P=0.018) and cerebrovascular disease (P=0.013) were higher than those in the group of <70 years old. All-cause mortality and cardiac mortality were also higher than those in the group of <70 years old (P=0.025, P=0.013). The follow-up period was (21.4±9.6) months. After adjusting for multiple clinical factors, there were no statistical differences of incidence of the total major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCE), myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular events, and revascularization recurrence between the two groups. But all-cause mortality (HR=3.790, 95%CI: 1.271-11.298, P=0.017) and cardiac mortality (HR=17.424, 95%CI: 2.440-124.410, P=0.004) in the group of age ≥70 years old were still remarkably higher than those in the group of <70 years old. Conclusions: Age is an independent risk factor for increased mortality after DES stent implantation in ULM disease. DES stent implantation in age ≥70 years old patients with ULM disease is considered feasible, but it needs to be treated with caution.

[Long-term outcomes of implanting drug-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery disease patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction]

Objective: To analyze the clinical characteristics and prognosis of implanting drug-eluting stents (DES) for unprotected left main (ULM) coronary artery disease patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD). Methods: A total of 511 ULM coronary artery disease patients who underwent DES implantation from January 2005 to January 2012 in Department of Cardiology, Beijing Anzhen Hospital were included in the study. Based on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), the patients were divided into three groups: LVEF≤40% (n=104), 41%≤LVEF≤49% (n=137), and LVEF≥50% (n=270). The clinical characteristics of patients undergoing DES implantation were retrospectively compared, and the effects of LVSD on ULM coronary artery disease were analyzed. Results: After comparison of clinical baseline data among three different LVEF groups, the incidence of peripheral vascular diseases, old myocardial infarction (OMI), multi-vessel lesions, complete revascularization and chronic total occlusion (CTO) was statistically different (P=0.002, P<0.001, P<0.001, P=0.049, P=0.001, respectively). However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of other clinical characteristics (all P>0.05). In terms of survival analysis, total mortality and cardiac mortality were both remarkably higher in LVEF≤40% group than those in LVEF≥50% group (both P<0.001). There was no statistical difference of total mortality between 41%≤LVEF≤49% group and LVEF≥50% group (P>0.05), while cardiac mortality was higher in LVEF≥50% group (P=0.027) . Besides, there was no significant difference among three groups in major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCE), myocardial infarction(MI), cerebral infarction and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (all P>0.05). After adjusting for multiple clinical factors, total mortality and cardiac mortality were both remarkably higher in LVEF≤40% group than those in LVEF≥50% group (P=0.002, P<0.001), while there were no statistical differences of total mortality and cardiac mortality between 41%≤LVEF≤49% group and LVEF≥50% group (both P>0.05). In terms of MACCE, MI, cerebral infarction and TVR, there were also no significant differences among three groups (all P>0.05). Conclusion: For ULM coronary artery disease patients with LVSD, implanting DES is safe and effective, but for those with severe LVSD (LVEF≤40%), DES implantation showed an increased risk of long-term death and therefore should be selected with great care.