Impact of Angiographic Complete Revascularization After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation or Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease
ABSTRACT This study sought to evaluate the clinical impact of angiographic complete revascularization (CR) after drug-eluting stent implantation or coronary artery bypass graft surgery for multivessel coronary disease.
A total of 1914 consecutive patients with multivessel coronary disease undergoing drug-eluting stent implantation (1400 patients) or coronary artery bypass graft surgery (514 patients) were enrolled. Angiographic CR was defined as revascularization in all diseased segments according to the Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery classification. The outcomes of patients undergoing CR were compared with those undergoing incomplete revascularization (IR) after adjustments with the inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting method. Angiographic CR was performed in 917 patients (47.9%) including 573 percutaneous coronary intervention (40.9%) and 344 coronary artery bypass graft (66.9%) patients. CR patients were younger and had more extensive coronary disease than IR patients. Over 5 years, CR patients had comparable incidences of death (8.9% versus 8.9%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.76 to 1.43; P=0.81), the composite of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke (12.1% versus 11.9%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.79 to 1.36; P=0.80), and the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeat revascularization (22.4% versus 24.9%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.75 to 1.10; P=0.32) compared with IR patients. However, 368 patients (19.2%) with multivessel IR had a greater tendency toward higher risk of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization (30.3% versus 22.1%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.27; 95% confidence interval, 0.97 to 1.66; P=0.079) than those without multivessel IR.
Angiographic CR with drug-eluting stent implantation or coronary artery bypass grafting did not improve long-term clinical outcomes in patients with multivessel disease. This finding supports the strategy of ischemia-guided revascularization.
- SourceAvailable from: PubMed Central[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: To compare long-term prognosis between complete revascularization (CR) and incomplete revascularization (IR) in elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We prospectively enrolled patients ≥ 75 years with ACS and multi-lesion disease between January 2005 and December 2010 at our center (Institute of Geriatric Cardiology, Chinese PLA General Hospital). Baseline clinical characteristics, PCI parameters and long-term (12 to 78 months) outcomes including main adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCE) were compared between CR and IR groups. We used the Kaplan-Meier curve to describe the survival rates, and variables reported to be associated with prognosis were included in Cox regression. Of the 502 patients, 230 patients obtained CR, and the other 272 patients underwent IR. Higher SYNTAX score was an independent predictor of IR [Odds ratio (OR): 1.141, 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.066-1.221, P = 0.000]. A total of 429 patients (85.5%) were followed with a duration ranging from 12 months to 78 months. There were no significant differences in cumulative survival rates and event free survival rates between the two groups, even for patients with multi-vessel disease. Older age (OR: 1.079, 95% CI: 1.007-1.157, P = 0.032), prior myocardial infarction (OR: 1.440, 95% CI: 1.268-2.723, P = 0.001) and hypertension (OR: 1. 653, 95% CI: 1.010-2.734, P = 0.050) were significant independent predictors of long-term MACCE. Given that both clinical and coronary lesion characteristics are much more complex in patients ≥75 years with ACS and multi-lesion disease, IR may be an option allowing low risk hospital results and meaningful long-term (12 to 78 months) outcomes.Journal of Geriatric Cardiology 12/2012; 9(4):336-43. DOI:10.3724/SP.J.1263.2012.05021 · 1.06 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) Authors/Task Force members: Stephan Windecker National Cardiac Societies document reviewers: listed in Addenda The content of these European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines has been published for personal and educational use only. No commercial use is authorized. No part of the ESC Guidelines may be translated or reproduced in any form without written permission from the ESC. Permission can be obtained upon submission of a written request to Oxford University Press, the publisher of the European Heart Journal and the party authorized to handle such permissions on behalf of the ESC. Other ESC entities having participated in the development of this document: Associations: Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACCA), European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR), European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI), European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), Heart Failure Association of the ESC (HFA).European Heart Journal 08/2014; DOI:10.1093/eurheartj/ehu278 · 14.72 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Invasive evaluation and treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) has traditionally been based upon coronary angiography to determine the need for and the success of revascularization. However, coronary angiography augmented with fractional flow reserve (FFR) creates a paradigm shift, providing a more complete functional assessment of coronary lesions. Measuring FFR to identify ischemic lesions and guide revascularization results in fewer adverse outcomes, including persistent angina, myocardial infarction, and mortality. An ischemic lesion identified by FFR is more likely to lead to adverse events when compared with an angiographically similar lesion with nonischemic FFR when both are treated medically. Although the mechanism explaining this is unclear, it is likely multifactorial, including the impact of mechanical forces, upregulation of inflammatory mediators, and the amount of distal myocardial tissue at risk. Using both anatomic and ischemia-guided assessments (such as the Functional SYNTAX Score) aids in the therapeutic decision-making process in patients with multivessel CAD. This review focuses on the evidence for FFR-guided management of multivessel CAD.Coronary Artery Disease 09/2014; 25(6):521-8. DOI:10.1097/MCA.0000000000000153 · 1.30 Impact Factor