Long-term outcomes of three-vessel coronary artery disease after coronary revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention using second-generation drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery

Investigation of the small-balloon technique as a method for retrieving dislodged stents

The small-balloon technique used to retrieve a dislodged coronary stent is less studied. We investigated the small-balloon technique to study the capture force and retrieval rate of dislodged proximal or distal stents. We developed a retrieval model for stent dislodgement and performed bench tests to compare proximal and distal capture. We evaluated capture force by capture site in a fixed stent dislodgement model and capture force and retrieval rate by capture site using a retrieval model of stent dislodgement. Three-dimensional (3D)-micro-computed tomography (CT) was used to scan the captured conditions of the distal (DC) and proximal (PC) groups. Stent, balloon shaft, and guiding catheter (GC) diameters were measured. Retrieval areas within GC were calculated and compared. The force was significantly lower in the PC group than in the DC group (p < 0.01). Successful retrieval was achieved in 100% and 84.8% in the PC and DC groups, respectively. The force required to retrieve the dislodged stent was significantly lower in the PC group than that in the DC group (p < 0.01). The force was significantly lower in the successful cases in the DC group than in the unsuccessful cases (p < 0.01). The retrievable areas in the PC and DC groups were 67.5% and 32.7%, respectively, as calculated from the values measured from the 3D-CT images. The success rate of PC was higher than that of DC using the small-balloon technique. The smaller proximal stent gap in the PC method facilitated the retrieval of the dislodgement stent.

Network meta-analysis of treatment strategies in patients with coronary artery disease and low left ventricular ejection fraction

OBJECTIVE

The optimal treatment strategy in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains controversial. Herein, we conducted a network meta-analysis comparing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients with CAD and low LVEF.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through March, 2021 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies comparing CABG, PCI, and OMT. We extracted hazard ratios (HRs) of the outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of three RCTs and 10 PSM trials were identified, yielding a total of 18,855 patients with CAD with low EF who were treated with CABG (n = 9241), PCI (n = 8771), or OMT (n = 1003). All-cause mortality was significantly lower in patients with CABG compared with those with PCI or OMT (HR [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 0.72 [0.62-0.82], p < .001, HR [95% CI] = 0.65 [0.51-0.82], p = .004, respectively), while no difference was observed between PCI and OMT. The rates of MI were significantly lower in patients treated with CABG compared to those treated with PCI or OMT. However, the subgroup analysis by limiting the PCI group to patients who received drug-eluting stent (DES) showed similar all-cause mortality between CABG and PCI, while both CABG and PCI were associated with lower all-cause mortality compared with OMT.

CONCLUION

The present study demonstrated that CABG was the appropriate treatment strategy in patients with CAD and low LVEF. Further long-term trials were warranted to investigate outcomes of PCI with DES compared with CABG.

Ten-year all-cause death following percutaneous or surgical revascularization in patients with prior cerebrovascular disease: insights from the SYNTAX Extended Survival study

BACKGROUND

Coronary bypass artery grafting (CABG) has a higher procedural risk of stroke than percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but may offer better long-term survival. The optimal revascularization strategy for patients with prior cerebrovascular disease (CEVD) remains unclear.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The SYNTAXES study assessed the vital status out to 10 year of patients with three-vessel disease and/or left main coronary artery disease enrolled in the SYNTAX trial. The relative efficacy of PCI vs. CABG in terms of 10 year all-cause death was assessed according to prior CEVD. The primary endpoint was 10 year all-cause death. The status of prior CEVD was available in 1791 (99.5%) patients, of whom 253 patients had prior CEVD. Patients with prior CEVD were older and had more comorbidities (medically treated diabetes, insulin-dependent diabetes, metabolic syndrome, peripheral vascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, impaired renal function, and congestive heart failure), compared with those without prior CEVD. Prior CEVD was an independent predictor of 10 year all-cause death (adjusted HR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.04-1.73; p = 0.021). Patients with prior CEVD had a significantly higher risk of 10 year all-cause death (41.1 vs. 24.1%; HR: 1.92; 95% CI: 1.54-2.40; p < 0.001). The risk of 10 year all-cause death was similar between patients receiving PCI or CABG irrespective of the presence of prior CEVD (p-interaction = 0.624).

CONCLUSION

Prior CEVD was associated with a significantly increased risk of 10 year all-cause death which was similar in patients treated with PCI or CABG. These results do not support preferential referral for PCI rather than CABG in patients with prior CEVD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

SYNTAX: ClinicalTrials.gov reference: NCT00114972. SYNTAX Extended Survival: ClinicalTrials.gov reference: NCT03417050.

Outcomes of robotic coronary artery bypass versus nonrobotic coronary artery bypass

BACKGROUND

Robotic coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) has developed in recent decades, however, prior studies showed conflicting result of robotic CABG compared to nonrobotic CABG in terms of mortality, morbidity, and cost. Herein, we sought to analyze the in-hospital outcomes and health care utilization after robotic CABG compared to nonrobotic CABG, based on data from a nationally representative sample.

METHODS

Patients who underwent CABG were identified using the national inpatient sample. Endpoints were in-hospital outcomes, length of stay, and total cost. Procedure-related complications were identified via international classification of diseases (ICD)-9 and ICD-10 coding and propensity score matching analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1,204,125 weighted adults underwent nonrobotic CABG and 7355 underwent robotic CABG in the United States between 2012 and 2017. The comparison of 7330 pairs after propensity score matching showed that in-hospital mortality was higher for those who underwent nonrobotic CABG compared to those who underwent robotic CABG (2.1% vs. 1.1%, p = .029). Similarly, the rates of acute kidney injury, transfusion, postoperative hemorrhage, length of stay, and total cost were higher for nonrobotic CABG compared to robotic CABG (all p < .05). The proportions of routine discharges with (34.5% vs. 40.0%) or without (39.7% vs. 45.0%) home health care were higher among those who underwent robotic, whereas the proportion of transfer to skilled nursing facility/nursing home was more frequent for cases of nonrobotic CABG (22.4% vs. 13.4%).

CONCLUSION

Robotic CABG was associated with lower rates of in-hospital mortality, acute kidney injury, transfusion, postoperative hemorrhage, total cost, and shorter hospital stay compared to nonrobotic CABG.

Clinical outcomes of complete versus incomplete revascularization in patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting: insights from the TiCAB trial

OBJECTIVES

In this post hoc analysis of the Ticagrelor in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) trial, we aimed to analyse patients treated with CABG receiving either complete revascularization (CR) or incomplete revascularization (ICR) independent from random allocation to either ticagrelor or aspirin.

METHODS

Of 1859 patients enrolled in the Ticagrelor in CABG trial, 1550 patients (83.4%) received CR and 309 patients (16.6%) ICR. Outcomes were evaluated regarding all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), repeat revascularization, stroke and bleeding within 12 months after CABG.

RESULTS

Baseline parameters revealed significant differences regarding clinical presentation (stable angina pectoris: CR 68.9% vs ICR 71.2%, instable angina pectoris: 14.1% vs 7.8%, non-ST elevation MI: 17.0% vs 21.0%, P ˂ 0.01), lesion characteristics (chronic total occlusion: CR 91.3% vs ICR 96.8%, P ˂ 0.01), operative technique [off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery (OPCAB): CR 3.0% vs ICR 6.1%, P ˂ 0.01] and number of utilized grafts (total number of grafts: 2.69/patient vs 2.49/patient, P ˂ 0.001). ICR patients displayed a significantly increased risk of repeat revascularization [hazard ratio (HR) 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.16-3.16; P < 0.01] and percutaneous coronary intervention (HR 1.95, 95% CI 1.13-3.35; P < 0.05) within 12 months after CABG. Higher risk for repeat revascularization in ICR patients was independent from random allocation to either ticagrelor or aspirin and persisted after adjustment for baseline imbalances.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with ICR presented more stable at the time of admission, but received less grafts, highly likely due to a higher rate of chronic total occlusion lesions and performed OPCAB. Although mortality presented no difference between groups, our results suggest that patients benefit from CR with regard to prevention of repeat revascularization.

Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: Insights From a Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

BACKGROUND

With newer generation drug eluting stents (DES), the minimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) recommended by guidelines has been reduced to 6 months in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Whether shorter duration of DAPT is safe in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains controversial. Our aim of this study was to investigate the optimal DAPT duration (≤3 months vs. 6 months vs. 12 months vs. >12 months) among patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

PUBMED and EMBASE were searched through January 2020 for randomized controlled trials of DAPT duration in patients with ACS. The ischemic outcomes were all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis. The safety outcome was major and/or clinically relevant bleeding.

RESULTS

Our search identified 14 eligible trials enrolling a total of 31,837 patients comparing different DAPT duration in patients with ACS. Short-term DAPT (≤3 months or 6 months) did not increase ischemic outcomes compared to long-term DAPT (12 months and >12 months). For bleeding outcomes, ≤3 months DAPT was associated with significant reduction in bleeding compared to 6 months, 12 months or >12 months DAPT (OR [95% CI]: 0.60 [0.37-0.98]; 0.68 [0.54-0.85] and 0.43 [0.34-0.54], respectively). These findings were similar when limited to 2nd generation DES.

CONCLUSIONS

Data from this meta-analysis of randomized trials support short-term (≤3 months and 6 months) DAPT in patients with ACS undergoing PCI. Guidelines might need to consider short-term DAPT even in patients presenting with ACS, especially in this era of newer generation DES.