Changes in the safety paradigm with percutaneous coronary interventions in the modern era: Lessons learned from the ASCERT registry

High Non-Cardiac Death Incidence Should Be a Limitation of Drug-Eluting Stents Implantation? Insights from Recent Randomized Data

Despite the introduction of drug-eluting stents (DES) significantly improved the efficacy and safety of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), particularly in a high-risk group of patients, the gap between PCI with his competitor’s coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) and/or optimal medical treatment alone was not reduced. In this revision, we highlighted the fact that in recent years landmark randomized studies reported at mid and long-term follow-ups a high incidence of non-cardiac death, cancer incidence, or both in the DES group of patients. The overall incidence of non-cardiac death was significantly higher in the DES vs. the comparator arm: 5.5% and 3.8%, respectively, p = 0.000018, and non-cardiac death appears to be more divergent between DES vs. the comparator at the extended follow-up to expenses of the last one. One of these trials reported five times greater cancer incidence in the DES arm at late follow-up, 5% vs. 0.7% p < 0.0018. We review the potential reason for these unexpected findings, although we can discard that DES biology could be involved in it. Until all these issues are resolved, we propose that DES implantation should be tailored accorded patient age, life expectancy, and lesion complexity.

Outcome of coronary artery bypass grafting in a tertiary-care center in Pakistan

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention are revascularization options for significant coronary artery disease. While international data support the use of coronary artery bypass in high-risk groups, regional data on outcomes in these groups are rare. We conducted a retrospective study to determine the outcomes of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass for left main and multivessel disease.

METHODS

Two thousand eight hundred and fifty-one patients undergoing coronary artery bypass at the Aga Khan University Hospital from 2006 to 2013 were included; patients undergoing redo surgery were excluded. Demographic data, comorbidities, angiography findings, in-hospital complications, one-month and one-year follow-up were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 2851 patients, 568 had left main disease (group 1) and 2283 (group 2) had multivessel disease (≥2 vessels excluding the left main). Group 1 had significantly more chronic lung disease, cardiogenic shock, and congestive heart failure than group 2 (p < 0.001); 50.6% of patients were diabetic and 71.8% were hypertensive. Mortality was 5.1% and 2.2% during hospital stay, 6.5% and 2.6% at 30 days, and 6.7% and 2.7% at 1 year in groups 1 and 2, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Our comparable results and international data advocate revision of the current practice of using percutaneous coronary intervention over coronary artery bypass in the developing world. Institutional results are essential to determine the outcome of coronary artery bypass in high-risk populations with a high burden of diabetes and hypertension. We noted increased complications and mortality in patients with left main rather than multivessel disease.

Five-year outcomes in patients with left main disease treated with either percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting in the synergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with taxus and cardiac surgery trial

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) when treating significant de novo left main coronary artery (LM) stenosis; however, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has a class IIa indication for unprotected LM disease in selected patients. This analysis compares 5-year clinical outcomes in PCI- and CABG-treated LM patients in the Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial, the largest trial in this group to date.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The SYNTAX trial randomly assigned 1800 patients with LM or 3-vessel disease to receive either PCI (with TAXUS Express paclitaxel-eluting stents) or CABG. The unprotected LM cohort (N=705) was predefined and powered. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event rates at 5 years was 36.9% in PCI patients and 31.0% in CABG patients (hazard ratio, 1.23 [95% confidence interval, 0.95-1.59]; P=0.12). Mortality rate was 12.8% and 14.6% in PCI and CABG patients, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.88 [95% confidence interval, 0.58-1.32]; P=0.53). Stroke was significantly increased in the CABG group (PCI 1.5% versus CABG 4.3%; hazard ratio, 0.33 [95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.92]; P=0.03) and repeat revascularization in the PCI arm (26.7% versus 15.5%; hazard ratio, 1.82 [95% confidence interval, 1.28-2.57]; P<0.01). Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were similar between arms in patients with low/intermediate SYNTAX scores but significantly increased in PCI patients with high scores (≥33).

CONCLUSIONS

At 5 years, no difference in overall major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events was found between treatment groups. PCI-treated patients had a lower stroke but a higher revascularization rate versus CABG. These results suggest that both treatments are valid options for LM patients. The extent of disease should accounted for when choosing between surgery and PCI, because patients with high SYNTAX scores seem to benefit more from surgery compared with those in the lower tertiles.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL

http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00114972.

Randomized trials of PCIs versus CABG surgery: why coronary stenting should remain the first choice of revascularization in non-diabetic patients and why the controversy is still present in diabetics

Knowing the best revascularization option for diabetic patients with multiple vessel disease is a challenge without a definitive answer. There have been several randomized clinical trials and subsequent meta-analyses comparing current available technology trying to reach an exhaustive conclusion; comparisons between coronary artery bypass grafts and bare-metal stents, coronary artery bypass grafts and first generation drug-eluting stents and, most recently, first generation versus latest generation drug-eluting stents generated some interesting results. Information provided by pooled data from some of the most important randomized clinical cardiology trials from the last two decades have produced surprising results. The authors analyze these data to discuss the best therapeutic procedures for each patient.