Clinical outcomes after PCI for acute coronary syndrome in unprotected left main coronary artery disease: insights from the Swiss Acute Left Main Coronary Vessel Percutaneous Management (SALVage) study

Unprotected left main (ULM) coronary artery disease is encountered in 3%-10% of coronary angiograms and is associated with high mortality. The survival of patients with ULM disease presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) depends on different variables and is lowest in those with cardiogenic shock (CS). The aim of the present study was to estimate the impact of baseline characteristics on the subsequent clinical outcome in patients treated by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of ULM for ACS.

Elective implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents for bifurcated and non-bifurcated unprotected left main coronary artery lesions: clinical outcomes at one year

AIMS: Recent studies of drug-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease have been encouraging. We examined the performance of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) for this indication. METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective study included 228 consecutive patients (mean age = 68 +/- 11 years, 80.6% men, 26.3% diabetics) who underwent implantation of SES for de novo LMCA stenoses. The mean additive and logistic EuroSCOREs were 5.2 +/- 3.9 and 8.2 +/- 13.2, respectively. The main objective of this study was to measure the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including death, myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularisation (TLR) at 12 months. Other objectives were to measure the rates of in-hospital MACE and 12-month TLR. Outcomes in 143 patients with (BIF+ group), versus 84 patients without (BIF-group) involvement of the bifurcation were compared. The pre-procedural percent diameter stenosis (%DS) was 60.1 +/- 11.2 in the BIF+ versus 54.7 +/- 12.2% in the BIF- group (p=0.008), and decreased to 18.0 +/- 9.7 and 13.9 +/- 11.3%, respectively (ns), after SES implant. The overall in-hospital MACE rate was 3.5%, and similar in both subgroups. The 1-year MACE rate was 14.5% overall, 16.8% in the BIF+ and 10.7% in the BIF- subgroup (ns). CONCLUSIONS: SES implants in high-risk patients with LMCA stenoses were associated with a low 1-year MACE rate. Stenting of the bifurcation was associated with significant increases in neither mortality nor 1-year MACE rate.

10-year follow-up of a prospective randomized trial comparing bare-metal stenting with internal mammary artery grafting for proximal, isolated de novo left anterior coronary artery stenosis the SIMA (Stenting versus Internal Mammary Artery grafting) trial

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare the long-term clinical outcome of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with intracoronary stenting of patients with isolated proximal left anterior descending coronary artery. BACKGROUND: Although numerous trials have compared coronary angioplasty with bypass surgery, none assessed the clinical evaluation in the long term. METHODS: We evaluated the 10-year clinical outcome in the SIMA (Stent versus Internal Mammary Artery grafting) trial. Patients were randomly assigned to stent implantation versus CABG. RESULTS: Of 123 randomized patients, 59 underwent CABG and 62 received a stent (2 patients were excluded). Follow-up after 10 years was obtained for 98% of the randomized patients. Twenty-six patients (42%) in the percutaneous coronary intervention group and 10 patients (17%) in the CABG group reached an end point (p < 0.001). This difference was due to a higher need for additional revascularization. The incidences of death and myocardial infarction were identical at 10%. Progression of the disease requiring additional revascularization was rare (5%) and was similar for the 2 groups. Stent thrombosis occurred in 2 patients (3%). Angina functional class showed no significant differences between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both stent implantation and CABG are safe and highly effective in relieving symptoms in patients with isolated, proximal left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis. Stenting with bare-metal stents is associated with a higher need for repeat interventions. The long-term prognosis for these patients is excellent with either mode of revascularization.

Impact of drug-eluting stent selection on long-term clinical outcomes in patients treated for unprotected left main coronary artery disease: the sirolimus vs paclitaxel drug-eluting stent for left main registry (SP-DELFT)

AIM: To compare the long-term relative efficacy and safety of SES and PES in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease and to evaluate the role of lesion location and stenting technique in determining outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: From April 2002 to April 2004, 288 consecutive patients who underwent elective PCI with DES implantation for de novo lesions on ULMCA have been retrospectively selected and analyzed in seven European and US tertiary care centers. All patients had a minimum follow-up of 3 years. SES was used in 152 patients while 136 received PES. Isolated ostial-shaft disease was present in 27% of patients. Distal LM disease (73%) was treated with single and double stent approach in 29.5% and 43.4% of patients respectively. After 3 years, rates of survival free from any of the events investigated, were independent from lesion location and stenting approach and did not differ significantly between SES and PES groups. Freedom from MACE (SES vs. PES) was 76.3% vs. 83.1% in the ostial/shaft group, 80.3% vs. 72.8% in the distal-single stent group and 67.1% vs. 66.2% in the distal-double stent group. Definite stent thrombosis occurred only in 1(0.3%) patient at 439 days. CONCLUSIONS: In elective patients who underwent PCI for de novo lesions in the ostium, shaft or distal ULMCA, long-term clinical outcomes with SES and PES use were similar independently of lesion location and stenting technique.

Longest available clinical outcomes after drug-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery disease: the DELFT (Drug Eluting stent for LeFT main) Registry

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the long-term safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. BACKGROUND: Long-term clinical outcomes after DES implantation for ULMCA disease have not yet been ascertained. METHODS: From April 2002 to April 2004, 358 consecutive patients who underwent PCI with DES implantation for de novo lesions on ULMCA were retrospectively selected and analyzed in 7 European and U.S. tertiary care centers. No patients were excluded from the analysis, and all patients had a minimum follow-up of 3 years. RESULTS: Technical success rate was 100%. Procedural success rate was 89.6%. After 3 years, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)-free survival in the whole population was 73.5%. According to the Academic Research Consortium definitions, cardiac death occurred in 9.2% of patients, and reinfarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) occurred in 8.6%, 5.8%, and 14.2% of patients, respectively. Definite stent thrombosis occurred in 2 patients (specifically at 0 and 439 days). In elective patients, the 3-year MACE-free survival was 74.2%, with mortality, reinfarction, TLR, and TVR rates of 6.2%, 8.3%, 6.6%, and 16%, respectively. In the emergent group the 3-year MACE-free survival was 68.2%, with mortality, reinfarction, TLR, and TVR rates of 21.4%, 10%, 2.8%, and 7.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Routine DES implantation in ULMCA disease seems encouraging, with favorable long-term clinical results.

Diabetic patients treated for unprotected left main coronary artery disease with drug eluting stents: a 3-year clinical outcome study. The diabetes and drug eluting stent for LeFT main registry (D-DELFT)

AIMS: Diabetes mellitus (DM) plays an important role in the development of coronary artery disease. Although previous studies have associated drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in diabetic patients with favourable clinical and angiographic outcomes, the very long-term efficacy of these devices in diabetic patients undergoing PCI for significant unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease has not been established yet. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive diabetic patients (n=100), who underwent elective PCI with DES for de novo lesions in an ULMCA between April 2002 and April 2004 in seven tertiary health care centres, were identified retrospectively and analysed. Consecutive non-diabetic patients (n=193), who underwent elective DES implantation for unprotected ULMCA disease, were selected as a control group. All patients were followed for at least 36 months. At 3-years follow-up, freedom from cardiac death ; myocardial infarction (CDMI), target lesion revascularisation (TLR) and target vessel revascularisation (TVR) did not differ significantly between groups. The adjusted freedom from major adverse cardiac events (MACE, defined as the occurrence of CD, MI or TVR) was 63.4% in the DM group and 77.6% in the controls (p<0.001). When divided into IDDM and NIDDM sub-groups, insulin-dependent DM (IDDM) but not non IDDM (NIDDM) patients had significantly lower freedom from CDMI, TLR, TVR and MACE compared to controls. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that major improvements in DES technology and pharmacotherapy are still required to improve clinical outcome and that the decision to perform percutaneous revascularisation in this subset of patients should be taken cautiously and on a case by case basis.

Intravascular ultrasound-based left main coronary artery assessment: comparison between pullback from left anterior descending and circumflex arteries

We compared continuous pullback from the left anterior descending artery (LAD) with pullback from the circumflex artery (CX) for the assessment of the left main coronary artery (LMCA) by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS).

Three-year efficacy and safety of new- versus early-generation drug-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery disease insights from the ISAR-LEFT MAIN and ISAR-LEFT MAIN 2 trials.

BACKGROUND In percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) has reduced adverse events in comparison to early-generation DES. The aim of the current study was to investigate the long-term clinical efficacy and safety of new-generation DES versus early-generation DES for PCI of unprotected left main coronary artery (uLMCA) disease. METHODS The patient-level data from the ISAR-LEFT MAIN and ISAR-LEFT MAIN 2 randomized trials were pooled. The clinical outcomes of PCI patients assigned to new-generation DES (everolimus- or zotarolimus-eluting stent) versus early-generation DES (paclitaxel- or sirolimus-eluting stent) were studied. The primary endpoint was the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization and stroke (MACCE, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event). RESULTS In total, 1257 patients were available. At 3 years, the risk of MACCE was comparable between patients assigned to new-generation DES or early-generation DES (28.2 versus 27.5 %, hazard ratio-HR 1.03, 95 % confidence intervals-CI 0.83-1.26; P = 0.86). Definite/probable stent thrombosis was low and comparable between new-generation DES and early-generation DES (0.8 versus 1.6 %, HR 0.52, 95 % CI 0.18-1.57; P = 0.25); in patients treated with new-generation DES no cases occurred beyond 30 days. Diabetes increased the risk of MACCE in patients treated with new-generation DES but not with early-generation DES (P interaction = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS At 3-year follow-up, a PCI with new-generation DES for uLMCA disease shows comparable efficacy to early-generation DES. Rates of stent thrombosis were low in both groups. Diabetes significantly impacts the risk of MACCE at 3 years in patients treated with new-generation DES for uLMCA disease. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00133237; NCT00598637.

Sex, Clinical Symptoms, and Angiographic Findings in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and Coronary Artery Disease (from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation [BARI] 2 Diabetes Trial)

Previous studies have reported differences in presenting symptoms and angiographic characteristics between women and men undergoing evaluation for suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). We examined the relation between symptoms and extent of CAD in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and known CAD enrolled in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial. Of 1,775 patients (533 women, 30%, and 1,242 men, 70%), women were more likely than men to have angina (65% vs 56%, p < 0.001) or an atypical angina/anginal equivalent (71% vs 58%, p < 0.001). More women reported unstable angina (17% vs 13%, p = 0.047) or were in a higher Canadian Cardiology Society class compared to men (Canadian Cardiology Society classes II to IV 78% vs 68%, p = 0.002). Fewer women than men had no symptoms (14% vs 22%, p < 0.001). Women had a lower mean myocardial jeopardy index (42.5 +/- 24.3 vs 47.9 +/- 24.3, p < 0.001), smaller number of total significant lesions (2.3 +/- 17 1.7 vs 2.7 +/- 1.8, p < 0.001), and fewer jeopardized left ventricular regions (p < 0.001 for distribution) or long-term occlusions (29% vs 42%, p < 0.001). After adjustment for relevant covariates, the odds of having CAD symptoms were still higher in women than men (odds ratio for angina 1.31, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.69; odds ratio for atypical angina 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.17 to 1.96). In conclusion, in a high-risk group of patients with known CAD and diabetes mellitus, women were more symptomatic than men but had less obstructive CAD. These data suggest that factors other than epicardial CAD severity influence symptom presentation in women in this population. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. (Am J Cardiol 2011;107:980-985)

Impact of number of vessels disease on outcome of patients with stable coronary artery disease: 5-year follow-up of the medical, angioplasty, and bypass surgery study (MASS)

Objective: To evaluate whether the number of vessels disease has an impact on clinical outcomes as well as on therapeutic results accordingly to medical, percutaneous, or surgery treatment in chronic coronary artery disease. Methods: We evaluated 825 individuals enrolled in MASS study, a randomized study to compare treatment options for single or multivessel coronary artery disease with preserved left ventricular function, prospectively followed during 5 years. The incidence of overall mortality and the composite end-point of death, myocardial infarction, and refractory angina were compared in three groups: single vessel disease (SVD n = 214), two-vessel disease (2VD n = 253) and three-vessel disease (3VD n = 358). The relationship between baseline variables and the composite end-point was assessed using a Cox proportional hazards survival model. Results: Most baseline characteristics were similar among groups, except age (younger in SVD and older in 3VD, p < 0.001), lower incidence of hypertension in SVD (p < 0.0001), and lower levels of total and LDL-cholesterol in 3VD (p = 0.004 and p = 0.005, respectively). There were no statistical differences in composite end-point in 5 years among groups independent of the kind of treatment; however, there was a higher mortality rate in 3VD (p < 0.001). When we stratified our analysis for each treatment option, bypass surgery was associated with a tower number of composite end-point in all groups (SVD p < 0.001, 2VD p = 0.002, 3VD p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, we found higher mortality risk in 3VD comparing to SVD (p = 0.005, HR 3.14, 95%Cl 1.4-7.0). Conclusion: Three-vessel disease was associated with worse prognosis compared to single-or two-vessel disease in patients with stable coronary disease and preserved ventricular function at 5-year follow-up. In addition, event-free survival rates were higher after bypass surgery, independent of the number of vessels diseased in these subsets of patients. (c) 2008 European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.