Long-term (4-year) outcomes and predictors of adverse cardiac events after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation in unprotected left main coronary artery

Meta-analysis study comparing percutaneous coronary intervention/drug eluting stent versus coronary artery bypass surgery of unprotected left main coronary artery disease: Clinical outcomes during short-term versus long-term (> 1 year) follow-up

BACKGROUND

Results on the safety and long-term efficacy of drug-eluting stent placement in unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCAD) compared with those of coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) remain inconsistent across randomized clinical trials and recent meta-analysis studies. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and safety over short- and long-term follow-ups by conducting a meta-analysis of large pooled data from randomized controlled trials and up-to-date observational studies.

METHODS

A systematic review of PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, and reference lists of related articles was performed for studies conducted in the drug-eluting stent era, to compare percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with CABG in ULMCAD. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, all-cause mortality, and revascularization after at least 1-year follow-up. In-hospital and 30-day clinical outcomes were considered secondary outcomes. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis of studies with ≥5 years follow-up was performed to test the sustainability of clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies were extracted with 21,832 patients (10,424 in PCI vs 11,408 in CABG). Pooled analysis demonstrated remarkable differences in long-term follow-up (≥1 year) MACCE (odds ratio [OR] 1.42, 95% CI 1.27-1.59), P < .00001), repeat revascularization (OR 3.00, 95% CI 2.41-3.73, P < .00001), and MI (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.14-1.53, P = .0002), favoring CABG over PCI. However, stroke risk was significantly lower in the PCI group. Subgroup analysis of studies with ≥5 years follow-up showed similar outcomes except for the noninferiority outcome of MACCE in the PCI arm. However, the PCI group proved good safety profile after a minimum of 30-day follow-up with lower MACCE outcome.

CONCLUSION

PCI for ULMCAD can be applied with attentiveness in carefully selected patients. MI and the need for revascularization remain drawbacks and areas of concern among previous studies. Nonetheless, it has been proven safe during short-term follow-up.

Intravascular ultrasound-guided unprotected left main coronary artery stenting in the elderly

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) could improve clinical outcomes compared with angiography-guided PCI in the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis (ULMCA) in the elderly.

METHODS

This controlled study was carried out between October 2009 and September 2012, in Qinhuangdao First Hospital, Hebei Province, China. One hundred and twenty-three consecutive patients with ULMCA, aged 70 or older, were randomized to an IVUS-guided group and a control group. The occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE): death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularizations) were recorded after 2 years of follow-up.

RESULTS

The IVUS-guided group had a lower rate of 2-year MACE than the control group (13.1% versus 29.3%, p=0.031). The incidence of target lesion revascularization was lower in the IVUS-guided group than in the control group (9.1% versus 24%, p=0.045). However, there were no differences in death and myocardial infarction in the 2 groups. On Cox proportional hazard analysis, distal lesion was the independent predictor of MACE (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.99, confidence interval [CI]: 1.129-2.367; p=0.043); IVUS guidance was independent factor of survival free of MACE (HR: 0.414, CI: 0.129-0.867; p=0.033).

CONCLUSION

The use of IVUS could reduce MACE in elderly patients undergoing ULMCA intervention.