Impact of prior cerebrovascular events on patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease treated with coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Pan Y
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8382338 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Impact of prior cerebrovascular events on patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease treated with coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention.
Pan Yu Y Mu Yu Y Liu Ze-Sen ZS Zhang Yu-Chen YC He Ji-Qiang JQ Yu Xian-Peng XP Qiu Qi Q
Chinese medical journal 20210804 16
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundData regarding management of patients with unprotected left main coronary artery in-stent restenosis (LM-ISR) are scarce.ObjectivesThis study investigated the safety and effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for the treatment of unprotected LM-ISR.MethodsConsecutive patients who underwent PCI or CABG for unprotected LM-ISR were enrolled. The primary endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and stroke.ResultsA total of 305 patients were enrolled, of which 203(66.6%) underwent PCI and 102(33.4%) underwent CABG. At 30-day follow-up, a lower risk of cardiac death was observed in the PCI group, compared with the CABG-treated group (2.1% vs. 7.1%, HR 3.48, 95%CI 1.01-11.8, p = 0.04). At a median of 3.5 years [interquartile range (IQR) 1.3-5.5] follow-up, MACCE occurred in 27.7% vs. 29.6% (HR 0.82, 95%CI 0.52-1.32, p = 0.43) in PCI- and CABG-treated patients, respectively. There were no significant differences between PCI and CABG in cardiac death (9.9% vs. 18.4%; HR 1.56, 95%CI 0.81-3.00, p = 0.18), MI (7.9% vs. 5.1%, HR 0.44, 95%CI 0.15-1.27, p = 0.13), or stroke (2.1% vs. 4.1%, HR 1.79, 95%CI 0.45-7.16, p = 0.41). TVR was more frequently needed in the PCI group (15.2% vs. 6.1%, HR 0.35, 95%CI 0.15-0.85, p = 0.02).ConclusionsThis analysis of patients with LM-ISR revealed a lower incidence of cardiac death in PCI compared with CABG in short-term follow-up. During the long-term follow-up, no differences in MACCE were observed, but patients treated with CABG less often required TVR.Visual overviewA visual overview is available for this article.Registrationhttps://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04968977.
| S-EPMC9125786 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Owing to a large-jeopardized myocardium, left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) represents the substantial high-risk anatomical subset of obstructive coronary artery disease. For several decades, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been the "gold standard" treatment for LMCAD. Along with advances in CABG, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has also dramatically evolved over time in conjunction with advances in the stent or device technology, adjunct pharmacotherapy, accumulated experiences, and practice changes, establishing its position as a safe, reasonable treatment option for such a complex disease. Until recently, several randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, and observational registries comparing PCI and CABG for LMCAD have shown comparable long-term survival with tradeoffs between early and late risk-benefit of each treatment. Despite this, there are still several unmet issues for revascularization strategy and management for LMCAD. This review article summarized updated knowledge on evolution and clinical evidence on the treatment of LMCAD, with a focus on the comparison of state-of-the-art PCI with CABG.
| S-EPMC10011221 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsThe optimal revascularization strategy for left main coronary artery disease (LMD) remains controversial, especially with two recent randomized controlled trials showing conflicting results. We sought to address this controversy with our analysis.Methods and resultsComprehensive literature search was performed. We compared percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for LMD revascularization using standard meta-analytic techniques. A 21% higher risk of long-term major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event [MACCE; composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and repeat revascularization] was observed in patients undergoing PCI in comparison with CABG [risk ratio (RR) 1.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.40]. This risk was driven by higher rate of repeat revascularization in those undergoing PCI (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.34-1.95). On the contrary, MACCE rates at 30 days were lower in PCI when compared with CABG (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39-0.76), which was driven by lower rates of stroke in the PCI arm (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.17-0.98). At 1 year, lower stroke rates (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.08-0.59) in the PCI arm were balanced by higher repeat revascularization rates in those undergoing PCI (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.33-2.37), resulting in a clinical equipoise in MACCE rates between the two revascularization strategies. There was no difference in death or MI between PCI when compared with CABG at any time point.ConclusionOutcomes of CABG vs. PCI for LMD revascularization vary over time. Therefore, individualized decisions need to be made for LMD revascularization using the heart team approach.
| S-EPMC5730452 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Older adults (?70-year-old) are under-represented in the published data pertaining to unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCAD). HYPOTHESIS:Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) might be comparable to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for revascularization of ULMCAD. METHODS:We compared PCI versus CABG in older adults with ULMCAD with an aggregate data meta-analyses (4880 patients) of clinical outcomes [all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), repeat revascularization, stroke and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events(MACCE)] at 30 days, 12-24 months & ?36 months in patients with mean age ?70 years and ULMCAD. A meta-regression analysis evaluated the effect of age on mortality after PCI. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using random-effects model. RESULTS:All-cause mortality between PCI and CABG was comparable at 30-days (OR0.77, 95% CI 0.42- 1.41) and 12-24-months (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.78-1.93). PCI was associated with a markedly lower rate of stroke at 30-day follow-up in octogenarians (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02-0.76) but an overall higher rate of repeat revascularization. At ?36-months, MACCE (OR 1.26,95% CI 0.99-1.60) and all-cause mortality (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.00-1.93) showed a trend favoring CABG but did not reach statistical significance. On meta-regression, PCI was associated with a higher mortality with advancing age (coefficient=0.1033, p=0.042). CONCLUSIONS:PCI was associated with a markedly lower rate of early stroke in octogenarians as compared to CABG. All-cause mortality was comparable between the two arms with a trend favoring CABG at ?36-months.PCI was however associated with increasing mortality with advancing age as compared to CABG.
| S-EPMC6837018 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery has traditionally represented the standard of care for left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. However, percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation (PCI) has more recently emerged as a valuable alternative. The long-time awaited results of the largest randomized trials on the long-term impact of PCI versus CABG in LMCA disease, the newly published NOBLE and EXCEL studies, revealed contrasting results. Thus, aim of the present meta-analysis was to review the most robust evidence from randomized comparisons of CABG versus PCI for revascularization of LMCA.MethodsRandomized studies comparing long-term clinical outcomes of CABG or Stent-PCI for the treatment of LMCA disease were searched for in PubMed, the Chochrane Library and Scopus electronic databases. A total of 5 randomized studies were selected, including 4499 patients.ResultsNo significant difference between CABG and PCI was found in the primary analysis on the composite endpoint of death, stroke and myocardial infarction (OR = 1·06 95% CI 0·80-1·40; p = 0·70). Similarly, no differences were observed between CABG and PCI for all-cause death (OR = 1·03 95% CI 0·81-1·32; p = 0·81). Although not statistically significant, a lower rate of stroke was registered in the PCI arm (OR = 0·86; p = 0·67), while a lower rate of myocardial infarction was found in the CABG arm (OR = 1·43; p = 0·17). On the contrary, a significantly higher rate of repeat revascularization was registered in the PCI arm (OR = 1·76 95% CI 1·45-2·13; p < 0·001).ConclusionsThe present meta-analysis, the most comprehensive and updated to date, including 5 randomized studies and 4499 patients, demonstrates no difference between Stent-PCI and CABG for the treatment of LMCA disease in the composite endpoint of death, stroke and myocardial infarction. Hence, a large part of patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease can be managed equally well by means of both these revascularization strategies.
| S-EPMC5588710 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceIn patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been the standard therapy for several decades. However, some studies suggest that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents may be an acceptable alternative.ObjectiveTo compare the long-term safety of PCI with drug-eluting stent vs CABG in patients with LMCA stenosis.Data sourcesPubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Knowledge, and ScienceDirect databases were searched from December 18, 2001, to February 1, 2017. Inclusion criteria were randomized clinical trial, patients with LMCA stenosis, PCI vs CABG, exclusive use of drug-eluting stents, and clinical follow-up of 3 or more years.Data extraction and synthesisTrial-level hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were pooled by fixed-effect and random-effects models with inverse variance weighting. Time-to-event individual patient data for the primary end point were reconstructed. Sensitivity analyses according to drug-eluting stent generation and coronary artery disease complexity were performed.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at long-term follow-up. Secondary end points included repeat revascularization and a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization at long-term follow-up.ResultsA total of 4 randomized clinical trials were pooled; 4394 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 3371 (76.7%) were men; pooled mean age was 65.4 years. According to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation, evidence quality with respect to the primary composite end point was high. Percutaneous coronary intervention and CABG were associated with a comparable risk of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke both by fixed-effect (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.90-1.24; P = .48) and random-effects (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.85-1.32; P = .60) analysis. Sensitivity analyses according to low to intermediate Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score (random-effects: HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.74-1.41; P = .89) and drug-eluting stent generation (first generation: HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.68-1.20; P = .49; second generation: HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.82-1.73; P = .36) were consistent. Kaplan-Meier curve reconstruction did not show significant variations over time between the techniques, with a 5-year incidence of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke of 18.3% (319 events) in patients treated with PCI and 16.9% (292 events) in patients treated with CABG. However, repeat revascularization after PCI was increased (HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.42-2.05; P < .001). Other individual secondary end points did not differ significantly between groups. Finally, pooled estimates of trials with LMCA stenosis tended overall to differ significantly from those of trials with multivessel coronary artery disease without left main LMCA stenosis.Conclusions and relevancePercutaneous coronary intervention and CABG show comparable safety in patients with LMCA stenosis and low to intermediate-complexity coronary artery disease. However, repeat revascularization is more common after PCI.
| S-EPMC5710445 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe role of sex in choosing between coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease has gained interest.MethodsRandomized controlled trials and adjusted observational studies comparing PCI versus CABG in ULMCA patients with outcomes by sex were included. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), with secondary endpoints being all-cause mortality and repeated revascularization.ResultsTen studies (3 randomized, 7 observational) involving 22,141 ULMCA disease patients (13,411 PCI, 8730 CABG) with a median 5-year follow-up were included. Among males, PCI was associated with a higher risk of MACE (HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.01-1.38), while no significant difference was seen in females. However, moderator analysis showed no significant interaction between sex and revascularization strategy for MACE (p for interaction .422). No differences in all-cause mortality were observed between PCI and CABG for either sex. Repeated revascularization risk was significantly higher with PCI for both sexes (HR 3.51, 95% CI 2.21-5.59 in males and HR 4.20, 95% CI 2.57-6.87 in females).ConclusionsIn males with ULMCA disease, CABG was associated with a lower risk of MACE compared to PCI, while no significant differences were seen in females. The lack of a significant interaction between sex and revascularization strategy suggests that these findings may not reflect true sex-based effect modification. PCI was linked to a higher risk of repeated revascularization in both sexes compared to CABG.Trial registrationThe protocol was registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (ID: CRD42024537726).
| S-EPMC11744918 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Mechanisms of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) differ as CABG provides surgical collateralization and may prolong life by preventing future myocardial infarctions (MI). However, CABG benefits are unclear in octogenarians, where surgical risk is often perceived as higher and PCI is chosen more liberally. We performed a meta-analysis of studies comparing outcomes in octogenarians with left main or multivessel disease who underwent CABG or PCI. Primary outcome was late mortality (> 5 years). Secondary outcomes were perioperative mortality, MI, re-revascularization (R-R), acute renal failure (ARF), and stroke. Fourteen studies with 17,942 patients were included. CABG was associated with lower late mortality (hazard ratio, HR: 1.23, 95% confidence interval: CI 1.05-1.44, p < 0.01). In the pooled Kaplan-Meier analysis CABG showed significantly lower risk of death in the follow-up compared to PCI (HR: 1.08, 95%CI 1.02-1.41, p = 0.005). Landmark analyses confirmed the survival advantage of CABG over PCI after 21.5 months of follow-up (HR: 1.31, 1.19-1.44, p < 0.0001), but suggested advantage of PCI over CABG in the first 30-days (HR: 0.72, 0.64-0.82, p < 0.0001) and comparable survival from 1 to 21.5 months (HR: 0.98, 0.92-1.05, p = 0.652). We found lower risk for MI and R-R after CABG but higher perioperative mortality and no differences in ARF and stroke. CABG appears superior to PCI over time in octogenarians with complex CAD. This survival advantage is associated with fewer events of MI and R-R; however, it comes with an increased risk in perioperative mortality.
| S-EPMC10724226 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Treatment of patients with left main coronary artery disease (LMCA) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with unprotected LMCA treated randomly by PCI or CABG. PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov database searches identified five randomized trials (RCTs) including 4499 patients with unprotected LMCA comparing PCI (n = 2249) vs. CABG (n = 2250), with a minimum clinical follow-up of five years. Random effect risk ratios were used for efficacy and safety outcomes. The study was registered in PROSPERO. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction or stroke. Compared to CABG, patients assigned to PCI had a similar rate of MACE (risk ratio (RR): 1.13; 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.36; p = 0.19), myocardial infarction (RR: 1.48; 95% CI: 0.97 to 2.25; p = 0.07) and stroke (RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.62 to 1.23; p = 0.42). Additionally, all-cause mortality (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.28; p = 0.48) and cardiovascular (CV) mortality (RR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.43; p = 0.31) were not different. However, the risk of any repeat revascularization (RR: 1.70; 95% CI: 1.34 to 2.15; p < 0.00001) was higher in patients assigned to PCI. The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that the long-term survival and MACE of patients who underwent PCI for unprotected LMCA stenosis were comparable to those receiving CABG, despite a higher rate of repeat revascularization.
| S-EPMC7408984 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Large number of patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) need repeat revascularization yearly, and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the optimal treatment strategy for such patients. However, it is still controversial whether PCI of native coronary artery or bypass graft is more beneficial. The aim of the study was to compare the clinical outcomes between native coronary artery vs. bypass graft PCI in patients with prior CABG. A total of 1,276 patients with prior CABG who underwent index PCI of native coronary artery (n=1,072) or bypass graft (n=204) were retrospectively examined. Patients were divided into native group and graft group according to the target vessel. The outcomes of the two groups were compared by using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and Cox regression analysis. The primary endpoint was the composite of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), which included all-cause death, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR). Compared with native group, patients in graft group had higher risk of slow-flow/no-reflow phenomenon (1.5% vs. 0.1%, P=0.011 before IPTW, and 2.2% vs. 0.1%, P<0.001 after IPTW) and peri-procedural stroke (0.3% vs. 0, P=0.021 after IPTW). During a median follow-up period of 43 months, there was similar risk of MACCE between two groups. Notably, patients in graft group had a significantly higher incidence of non-fatal MI compared with native group regardless with or without IPTW (7.8% vs. 3.8%, P=0.018 and 8.3% vs. 3.9%, P=0.030, separately). After adjusting for confounding by using Cox regression, bypass graft PCI was associated with a higher risk of non-fatal MI (HR: 2.091, 95% CI: 1.069-4.089; P=0.031), but similar results in MACCE (HR: 1.077, 95% CI: 0.817-1.419; P=0.599) compared with native group. This study found that native coronary artery might be preferred for PCI in patients with prior CABG because of lower rates of slow-flow/no-reflow, peri-procedural stroke, and non-fatal MI at follow-up.
| S-EPMC10636451 | biostudies-literature