A meta-analysis of 3,773 patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention or surgery for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis.

Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California 90048, USA.
JACC. Cardiovascular Interventions (Impact Factor: 1.07). 09/2009; 2(8):739-47. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2009.05.020
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This study sought to understand the total weight of evidence regarding outcomes in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis.
Following a diagnosis of significant ULMCA stenosis in an individual that is a candidate for surgery, CABG is recommended by the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines, whereas PCI is not recommended (Class III).
Databases were searched for clinical studies that reported outcomes after PCI and CABG for the treatment of ULMCA stenosis. Ten studies were identified that included a total of 3,773 patients.
Meta-analysis showed that death, myocardial infarction, and stroke (major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events) were similar in the PCI- and CABG-treated patients at 1 year (odds ratio [OR]: 0.84 [95% confidence interval: 0.57 to 1.22]), 2 years (OR: 1.25 [95% CI: 0.81 to 1.94]), and 3 years (OR: 1.16 [95% CI: 0.68 to 1.98]). Target vessel revascularization was significantly higher in the PCI group at 1 year (OR: 4.36 [95% CI: 2.60 to 7.32]), 2 years (OR: 4.20 [95% CI: 2.21 to 7.97]), and 3 years (OR: 3.30 [95% CI: 0.96 to 11.33]). There was no difference in mortality in PCI- versus CABG-treated patients at 1 year (OR: 1.00 [95% CI: 0.70 to 1.41]), 2 years (OR: 1.27 [95% CI: 0.83 to 1.94]), and 3 years (OR: 1.11 [95% CI: 0.66 to 1.86]).
Our analysis reveals no difference in mortality or major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events, for up to 3 years, between PCI and CABG for the treatment of ULMCA stenosis. However, PCI patients had a significantly higher risk of target vessel revascularization. In selected patients with ULMCA stenosis, PCI is emerging as an acceptable option.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Heavily calcified left-main coronary diseases (LMCA) remain a formidable challenge for percutaneous interventions (PCI). This study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of using rotational atherectomy (RA) in treating such lesions in actual practice. From February 2004 to March 2012, all consecutive patients who received RA for heavily-calcified LMCA lesions in our cath lab were enrolled. The relevant clinical and angiographic characteristics at the time of index PCI, as well as the clinical follow-up outcomes, were retrieved and analyzed. A total of 34 consecutive patients were recruited with a mean age 77.2 ± 10.2 years. There were 82.4% presented with acute coronary syndrome and 11.8% with cardiogenic shock. Chronic renal disease and diabetes were seen in 64.7% and 52.9%, respectively. Triple-vessel coronary disease was found in 76.5% of them. The mean SYNTAX score was 50 ± 15 and EuroSCORE II scale 5.6 ± 4.8. The angiographic success rate was 100% with a procedural success rate of 91.2%. The mean number of burrs per patient was 1.7 ± 0.5. Crossing-over stenting was used in 64.7%. Most stents were drug-eluting (67.6%). Intra-aortic ballon pump was used in 20.6% of the procedures. Three patients died during hospitalization, all due to presenting cardiogenic shock. No major complication occurred. Among 31 hospital survivors, the major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rate was 16.1%, all due to target lesion revascularization or target vessel revascularization. In high-surgical-risk elderly patients, plaque modification with RA in PCI of heavily-calcified LMCA could be safely accomplished with a minimal complication rate and low out-of-hospital MACE.
    Journal of Geriatric Cardiology 09/2013; 10(3):217-25.
  • Source
    EuroIntervention: journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology 01/2014; 9(9):1013-20. · 3.17 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Many studies have reported comparable risk of hard end points between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis. However, there are limited data regarding the morbidity associated with ULMCA revascularization. This study sought to compare the cause and risk of readmissions after PCI and CABG for ULMCA stenosis. We evaluated the unadjusted and adjusted risk of readmissions in 1,352 patients (783 PCI treated and 569 CABG treated) who were consecutively enrolled in a multicenter registry of patients with ULMCA stenosis, named the Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease trial. Overall, 206 PCI-treated patients (26.3%) experienced at least 1 readmission after the index procedure during 48.7 ± 16.0 months of follow-up compared with 84 CABG-treated patients (14.8%, p <0.001). The most frequent causes of readmission were repeat revascularization after PCI (41%) and noncardiac readmissions after CABG (48%). Through repeated events analysis, PCI was associated with more frequent readmissions than CABG (hazard ratio 2.037, 95% confidence interval 1.542 to 2.692, p <0.001), being an independent predictor of readmission (hazard ratio 1.820, 95% confidence interval 1.420 to 2.331, p <0.001). Except for the acute period, defined as the first 3 months, when there was no significant difference in readmission rate, a higher readmission rate after PCI was consistently observed over the remainder of the follow-up period. In conclusion, PCI was shown to be associated with a higher risk of readmission than CABG in treating ULMCA disease. This higher risk was attributable to more frequent revascularization in the PCI group.
    The American journal of cardiology 03/2014; · 3.58 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 5, 2014