Benefit Of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Research Articles

Percutaneous coronary intervention vs. medical therapy in patients on dialysis with coronary artery disease in China.

The available evidence regarding the benefits of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on patients receiving dialysis with coronary artery disease (CAD) is limited and inconsistent. This study aimed to evaluate the association between PCI and clinical outcomes as compared with medical therapy alone in patients undergoing dialysis with CAD in China. This multicenter, retrospective study was conducted in 30 tertiary medical centers across 12 provinces in China from January 2015 to June 2021 to include patients on dialysis with CAD. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and non-fatal stroke. Secondary outcomes included all-cause death, the individual components of MACE, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria types 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the association between PCI and outcomes. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and propensity score matching (PSM) were performed to account for potential between-group differences. Of the 1146 patients on dialysis with significant CAD, 821 (71.6%) underwent PCI. After a median follow-up of 23.0months, PCI was associated with a 43.0% significantly lower risk for MACE (33.9% [n=278] vs. 43.7% [n=142]; adjusted hazards ratio 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.45-0.71), along with a slightly increased risk for bleeding outcomes that did not reach statistical significance (11.1% vs. 8.3%; adjusted hazards ratio 1.31, 95% confidence interval, 0.82-2.11). Furthermore, PCI was associated with a significant reduction in all-cause and cardiovascular mortalities. Subgroup analysis did not modify the association of PCI with patient outcomes. These primary findings were consistent across IPTW, PSM, and competing risk analyses. This study indicated that PCI in patients on dialysis with CAD was significantly associated with lower MACE and mortality when comparing with those with medical therapy alone, albeit with a slightly increased risk for bleeding events that did not reach statistical significance.

PCI in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation.

The benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with stable coronary artery disease and severe aortic stenosis who are undergoing transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) remains unclear. In an international trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and at least one coronary-artery stenosis with a fractional flow reserve of 0.80 or less or a diameter stenosis of at least 90% either to undergo PCI or to receive conservative treatment, with all patients also undergoing TAVI. The primary end point was a major adverse cardiac event, defined as a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization. Safety, including bleeding events and procedural complications, was assessed. A total of 455 patients underwent randomization: 227 to the PCI group and 228 to the conservative-treatment group. The median age of the patients was 82 years (interquartile range, 78 to 85), and the median Society of Thoracic Surgeons-Procedural Risk of Mortality score (on a scale from 0 to 100%, with higher scores indicating a greater risk of death within 30 days after the procedure) was 3% (interquartile range, 2 to 4). At a median follow-up of 2 years (interquartile range, 1 to 4), a major adverse cardiac event (primary end point) had occurred in 60 patients (26%) in the PCI group and in 81 (36%) in the conservative-treatment group (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.51 to 0.99; P = 0.04). A bleeding event occurred in 64 patients (28%) in the PCI group and in 45 (20%) in the conservative-treatment group (hazard ratio, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.03 to 2.22). In the PCI group, 7 patients (3%) had PCI procedure-related complications. Among patients with coronary artery disease who were undergoing TAVI, PCI was associated with a lower risk of a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization at a median follow-up of 2 years than conservative treatment. (Funded by Boston Scientific and the Danish Heart Foundation; NOTION-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03058627.).

Complete vs. incomplete percutaneous revascularization in patients with chronic total coronary artery occlusion.

There is current controversy surrounding the benefits of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of chronic total coronary occlusions (CTO). We aimed to evaluate the impact of complete percutaneous revascularization on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with CTO. A retrospective observational study was conducted of consecutive patients referred for invasive coronary angiography at a single center between January 2018 and December 2019 and at least a CTO. The patients were divided into two groups according to the result of the procedure: complete revascularization of CTO (CR-CTO) versus incomplete revascularization (ICR-CTO) (patients with at least one non-recanalized CTO). Short- and mid-term clinical outcomes were evaluated. The primary endpoint was a composite of MACE that included all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or unplanned revascularization. In total, 359 patients with CTO were included. The median age was 68 years [interquartile range (IQR) 60-77 years], 66 (18%) were women and 169 (47.3%) had diabetes mellitus. In all, 167 (46.5%) patients received complete revascularization. After a median follow-up of 42 months (IQR 46-50 months), the primary endpoint occurred in 39 (23.4%) patients in the CR-CTO group and in 75 (39.1%) in the ICR-CTO group (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.34-0.74; p < 0.001). This association remained significant in an inverse probability weighted model considering prognostic factors (adjusted HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.41-0.92; p = 0.018) and was driven by lower rates of all-cause death (adjusted OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.23-0.84; p = 0.01). Complete revascularization of CTO was associated with a lower risk of MACE in the midterm follow up.

Abstract 16635: Cost Effectiveness Analysis of the Percutaneous Revascularization for Ischemic Left Ventricular Dysfunction REVIVED Trial Data

Introduction. Evidence on survival benefits of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with severe ischemic left ventricular systolic dysfunction (ILVD) is scant. The REVIVED trial showed that, compared to optimal medical therapy (OMT), revascularisation by PCI did not reduce the incidence of death from any cause or heart failure hospitalization (HF); it also failed to provide sustained improvements in health-related quality of life. REVIVED data are used to evaluate the economic consequences and health outcomes of PCI+OMT and OMT alone in HF patients in the UK. Methods. 700 patients with ILVD were randomised to either PCI+OMT or OMT. Healthcare resource use and patient-reported health outcomes data EuroQol on each patient were collected at baseline and over a period of 8 years post randomisation (median follow up of 3.5 years). Health resources were costed using publicly available national unit costs from the perspective of the UK health system. Within trial mean total costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated and incremental cost effectiveness was evaluated. Regression analysis on total costs and total QALYs was used to adjust for clinically relevant baseline covariables. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to reflect parameter uncertainty. Results. Statistical modelling identified gender, BMI, hypertension, diabetes, NYHA grade and previous hospitalisation as the most relevant baseline predictors of costs and benefits. Over the 8 years of fu, patients undergoing PCI yielded, on average, similar health benefits (4.13 QALYs IC [4.10 - 4.16]) at higher costs (£14,674 IC[£14,334 - £15,014]), compared to OMT (4.16 QALYs [4.13 - 4.19]; £5154 IC [£5,034 - £5,273]). Conclusion. We found no difference in total QALYs between arms and PCI+OMT was not cost-effective compared to OMT, given its additional costs. Therefore, a strategy of routine PCI to treat ILVSD does not appear to be a justifiable use of healthcare resources.

The Benefit of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Before Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Multicenter Retrospective Outcome-Based Study

There is inadequate evidence regarding the role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The current American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines are limited to class 2A recommendations for pre-TAVR revascularization in the setting of hemodynamically significant left main (LM), proximal left anterior descending (pLAD), or extensive bifurcation disease regardless of angina status. We performed a multicenter, retrospective, observational study assessing the benefit of PCI in patients with coronary artery disease who underwent transfemoral TAVR for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts: (1) patients who did not undergo pre-TAVR PCI within the preceding 12months (no-PCI group) and (2) patients who received pre-TAVR PCI within the preceding 12months (PCI group). The primary outcome was defined as the composite end point of in-hospital and 30-day adverse events, including all-cause mortality, cardiac arrest, and myocardial infarction. Subgroup analyses were performed on patients with LM and/or pLAD disease and other high-risk features, including angina and heart failure. Comparisons were made between 1,809 consecutive patients (1,364 in the no-PCI group and 445 in the PCI group). There were no differences between the 2 cohorts regarding the primary composite outcome (2.0% vs 2.8%, p=0.918) or individual secondary outcomes. Although LM/pLAD disease, New York Heart Association classes III to IV, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score ≥8 were all independent predictors of the primary outcome, none of the subgroups demonstrated a benefit favoring PCI. In conclusion, there is no observed benefit from PCI within 12months pre-TAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis and concomitant coronary artery disease, including patients with LM/pLAD disease.

Myocardial Revascularization in Patients With Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: For Whom and How.

Background Myocardial revascularization has been advocated to improve myocardial function and prognosis in ischemic cardiomyopathy (ICM). We discuss the evidence for revascularization in patients with ICM and the role of ischemia and viability detection in guiding treatment. Methods and Results We searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating the prognostic impact of revascularization in ICM and the value of viability imaging for patient management. Out of 1397 publications, 4 randomized controlled trials were included, enrolling 2480 patients. Three trials (HEART [Heart Failure Revascularisation Trial], STICH [Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure], and REVIVED [REVascularization for Ischemic VEntricular Dysfunction]-BCIS2) randomized patients to revascularization or optimal medical therapy. HEART was stopped prematurely without showing any significant difference between treatment strategies. STICH showed a 16% lower mortality with bypass surgery compared with optimal medical therapy at a median follow-up of 9.8 years. However, neither the presence/extent of left ventricle viability nor ischemia interacted with treatment outcomes. REVIVED-BCIS2 showed no difference in the primary end point between percutaneous revascularization or optimal medical therapy. PARR-2 (Positron Emission Tomography and Recovery Following Revascularization) randomized patients to imaging-guided revascularization versus standard care, with neutral results overall. Information regarding the consistency of patient management with viability testing results was available in ≈65% of patients (n=1623). No difference in survival was revealed according to adherence or no adherence to viability imaging. Conclusions In ICM, the largest randomized controlled trial, STICH, suggests that surgical revascularization improves patients' prognosis at long-term follow-up, whereas evidence supports no benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention. Data from randomized controlled trials do not support myocardial ischemia or viability testing for treatment guidance. We propose an algorithm for the workup of patients with ICM considering clinical presentation, imaging results, and surgical risk.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Is Not Superior to Optimal Medical Therapy in Chronic Coronary Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis.

(1) Background and Aim: Conflicting evidence exists regarding the benefits of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on survival and symptomatic relief of patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) compared with optimal medical therapy (OMT). This meta-analysis is to evaluate the short- and long-term clinical benefit of PCI over and above OMT in CCS. (2) Methods: Main endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), urgent revascularization, stroke hospitalization, and quality of life (QoL). Clinical endpoints at very short (≤3 months), short- (<12 months), and long-term (≥ 12 months) follow-up were evaluated. (3) Results: Fifteen RCTs with a total of 16,443 patients with CCS (PCI n = 8307 and OMT n = 8136) were included in the meta-analysis. At mean follow-up of 27.7 months, the PCI group had similar risk of MACE (18.2 vs. 19.2 %; p < 0.32), all-cause mortality (7.09 vs. 7.88%; p = 0.56), CV mortality (8.74 vs. 9.87%; p = 0.30), MI (7.69 vs. 8.29%; p = 0.32), revascularization (11.2 vs. 18.3%; p = 0.08), stroke (2.18 vs. 1.41%; p = 0.10), and hospitalization for anginal symptoms (13.5 vs. 13.9%; p = 0.69) compared with OMT. These results were similar at short- and long-term follow-up. At the very short-term follow-up, PCI patients had greater improvement in the QoL including physical limitation, angina frequency, stability, and treatment satisfaction (p < 0.05 for all) but such benefits disappeared at the long-term follow-up. (4) Conclusions: PCI treatment of CCS does not provide any long-term clinical benefit compared with OMT. These results should have significant clinical implications in optimizing patient's selection for PCI treatment.

Cardiovascular imaging techniques for the assessment of coronary artery disease.

Coronary artery disease continues to be the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Recent clinical trials have not demonstrated any mortality benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention compared to medical management alone in the treatment of stable angina. While invasive coronary angiography remains the gold standard for diagnosing coronary artery disease, it comes with significant risks, including myocardial infarction, stroke and death. There have been significant advances in imaging techniques to diagnose coronary artery disease in haemodynamically stable patients. The latest National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and European College of Cardiology guidelines emphasise the importance of using these imaging techniques first to inform diagnosis. This review discusses these guidelines and imaging techniques, alongside their benefits and drawbacks.

Effect and benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention in chronic total occlusion on ventricular repolarization: QT correction and dispersion.

ST segment, T wave changes, QT interval changes, and QTc dispersion are among the parameters used to diagnose ischemic heart disease. The increase in the QT dispersion can be caused by myocardial ischemia, among other heart diseases, whereas cardiac diseases such as coronary artery disease (CAD) can be diagnosed by observing an abnormally high QTc dispersion. This study aimed to evaluate the variations in the QTc dispersion (depolarization and repolarization) of surface electrocardiography as a result of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with chronic total occlusion. This study took place in the Iraqi Center for Heart Disease from October 2020 to February 2021. 110 patients who suffered from chronic occlusion of the coronary artery and underwent PCI revascularization were examined. Twelve-lead electrocardiograms were recorded at the time of admission (12 hours before intervention) and more than one hour after the intervention. The measured ECG parameters included corrected QT interval durations and corrected QT dispersion in both pre and post-PCI electrocardiograms, and their values were compared. The average corrected QT interval and QTC dispersion changed significantly before and after the percutaneous coronary intervention. Performing percutaneous coronary intervention on patients who suffer from coronary artery total occlusion shows a major reduction in the corrected QT dispersion.

The Impact of Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on the Reduction of Major Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Chronic Total Coronary Occlusion In dr. Saiful Anwar's Malang Hospital

Background: Chronic total coronary occlusion (CTOs) is associated with an increased risk of adverse clinical outcomes. The benefits of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in CTO are still being debated due to the limited data available. This study aims to determine the relationship between the success of PCI in CTOs and the reduction of major cardiovascular events compared to those who failed or did not perform revascularization in patients with chronic coronary total occlusion in RSUD by Dr. Saiful Anwar Malang. Methods:This study is an analytic observational study with a retrospective cohort design. Of a total of 2165 patients who underwent angiography at Saiful Anwar Hospital, Malang, for the period August 2017–September 2020, consecutively, 578 patients with lesions of at least one CTO were found. There were 68 patients who were excluded, so 510 patients were analyzed in this study. They were divided into two groups, the CTO group that was successfully revascularized with PCI (n = 141) and the group that was not revascularized (n = 369). The outcome of this study was major cardiovascular events (MACE), which included cardiac mortality , all cause mortality, and rehospitalization events. Result: Patients with CTO who were not revascularized compared to those with revascularized CTO had a higher history of heart failure, involvement of LM disease, multivessel disease, and three vessel disease (41.2% vs 18.4%, p = 0.041; 16.5% vs 1.8%, p &lt; 0.001; 69.4% vs 22.7%, p &lt; 0.001; 56.5% vs 14.1%, p &lt; 0.001) with a lower mean LVEF (0.49 ± 0.06 vs 0.51 ± 0.07, p=0.045) and older age (60±9 vs 57±8 years ; p=0.007).. At a 12-month follow-up, in the CTO group that was successfully revascularized by PCI, there was a better prognosis than the non-revascularized CTO group in terms of major cardiovascular events (19.9% vs 33.1% Plog-rank = 0.002). These results were consistent for all-cause mortality (5.5% vs 20.6%, Plog-rank =0.027), cardiac mortality (3.7% vs 20.6%, Plog-rank &lt; 0.001) and rehospitalization events. (7.5% vs 32.2%, Plog-rank = 0.001). Conclusion: Successful revascularization of CTO by PCI may provide clinical benefits in patients with CTO in association with major cardiovascular events.

What is the clinical benefit of left main coronary artery treatment by percutaneous coronary intervention?

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction The treatment of choice of left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease has been subject to intense debate and investigation in the last decade. More recent studies showed benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with less complex coronary anatomy. Although it is not the standard treatment, the use of this technique has been increasing. Objectives Characterize the patient population undergoing LMCA PCI and analyze its clinical benefit. Also, try to identify patient profiles according to the composite outcome (angor, heart failure symptoms (HF), myocardial infarction (MI) or death) in short and medium term (30 days (D) and 180D). Methods Observational and retrospective study of patients submitted to LMCA PCI, between 1 January 2019 and 31 December 2020. A descriptive analysis was carried out. Chi-Square test was used for categorical variables and the T-Student test for numerical variables, with a significance level of 95%. CHIAD algorithm was applied to identify patient profiles – composite outcome was the dependent variable (fixed 15 parent nodes and 5 children nodes). For statistical analysis, SPSS 24.0 was used. Results N120 patients, mean age of 70,4 years (standard deviation of 10.8), 76% were male. 81.7% had multivessel disease, with LMCA-anterior descendig artery injury being the most frequent (31.7%). The average LVEF was 49%. The complication rate was 15.8%, most vessel dissections. The most serious complications (cardio-respiratory arrest and cardiogenic shock) occurred in 0.8% of cases. The composite outcome occurred in 25,2% (30D) and 13,3% (180D), regardless of past medical history and number/type of vessels affected. The presence of angor was 9.9% (30D) and 1.3% (180D); HF symptoms in 13.5% (30D) and 4.8% (180D); MI in 2.7% (30D) and 1.2% (180D) and mortality in 2.7% (30D) and 2.4% (180D). In a logic of dependence and profiles, patients with LVEF [45-55%] (95.6%-p=0.003) who treated the lesions in first intention (AdHoc) (100%-p=0.009) presented fewer occurrences at 30D. Patients with occurrences at 30D (65.2%-p=0.001) or without PV of LVEF (66.7%-p = 0.016) and dyslipidemia (53.8%-p = 0.027) were those with most occurrences at 180D. Conclusion This analysis highlights the experience of the angiography laboratory. The majority of patients experienced evident clinical improvement and recovered in shortand medium term. The rate of serious events was low. The analysis suggests that the greatest benefit were found in the profile of patients with LVEF [45-55%] with an AdHoc approach.

Evaluating the efficacy and safety of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus the optimal drug therapy (ODT) for stable coronary heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BackgroundMany studies have reported potential benefits of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus optimal drug therapy (ODT) for patients with stable coronary heart disease but with inconsistent results. To examine this, an explicit systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to compared the clinical outcomes of PCI and ODT in these patients.MethodsThe following terms were combined to search relative articles through databases PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and Web of Science published from January 2010 to November 2021 according to Participants, Intervention, Control, Outcomes, Study (PICOS) criteria: “coronary heart disease”, “stable coronary heart disease”, “stable angina pectoris”, “percutaneous coronary intervention”, “PCI”, “percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty”, “drug therapy”, “optimized drug treatment”, and “optimized drug therapy”. The meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.2, and the Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies.ResultsA total of 12 articles were included in the final analysis. There were 4,288 cases of PCI patients and 4,261 cases of ODT patients. The results showed that, when comparing PCI with ODT, there was a significant difference in the probability of myocardial infarction [relative risk (RR) =0.63; 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.45–0.90] and the patient mortality (RR =0.51; 95% CI: 0.40–0.64). However, there was no significant difference in the prevalence of stroke (RR =1.33; 95% CI: 0.82–2.17), revascularization (RR =0.86; 95% CI: 0.46–1.62) and patient quality of life (MD =10.44; 95% CI: −1.84 to 22.73). Performance bias and detection bias were all unclear in the included studies and should be warned.DiscussionCompared with ODT, PCI reduced the mortality and myocardial infarction rate of patients with CTO or severe coronary artery stenosis. However, the incidence of stroke, revascularization, and quality of life of patients were not significant different between PCI and ODT. Performance bias and detection bias should be cautioned.

Quantification of strain analysis and late gadolinium enhancement in coronary chronic total occlusion: a cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging follow-up study.

The present study aimed to investigate the benefits of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with chronic total occlusions (CTOs) by using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) feature tracking. Fifty-five CTOs with successful CTO-PCI underwent CMR at baseline and 12 months. Feature tracking was applied to measure left ventricle strain index in CTOs with decreased and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). CTOs were also divided into two groups according to the infarct size of 10% or combined with multi-vessel disease. We also measured these parameters in 40 healthy subjects. Three quarters of CTOs showed preserved ejection fraction and no enlargement of left ventricle at baseline, but the global strains were lower than the controls (all P<0.01). In the entire CTO population, left ventricular ejection fraction did not show significant improvement in the 1-year follow-up (59.8%±11.3% vs. 62.0%±8.6%, P=0.08). However, global strains improved over time, and peak global radial strain and circumferential strain showed significant treatment effect of CTO-PCI in the entire CTO population (31.1%±9.9% vs. 34.3%±8.7%, P<0.01; -17.9±3.6 vs. -19.2±3.1, P<0.01), and the subgroup with decreased LVEF, infarct size less than 10%, or multi-vessel disease, but not with the 1-vessel disease. In the LAD and LCX CTO territory, radial and circumferential strain showed treatment effect of CTO-PCI on the recovery of strain parameters (P<0.01 for both). In the RCA CTO territory, circumferential and longitudinal strain showed treatment effect of CTO-PCI on the recovery of strain parameters (P<0.05 for both). In this single center study, global radial strain and circumferential strain showed treatment effect of successful CTO-PCI at 1-year follow-up in CTOs with the decreased LVEF, infarct size less than 10%, or multi-vessel disease, and the regional strain also showed a similar trend. However, the benefit of CTO-PCI on the strain recovery was not shown in patients with 1-vessel disease. Therefore, whether patients with CTO benefit from PCI still needs further verification.

Preprocedural transthoracic Doppler echocardiography to identify stenosis associated with increased coronary flow after revascularisation

The benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been reported to be associated with functional stenosis severity defined by fractional flow reserve (FFR). This study aimed to investigate the predictive ability of preprocedural transthoracic Doppler echocardiography (TDE) for increased coronary flow. A total of 50 left anterior descending arteries (LAD) that underwent TDE examinations were analysed. Hyperaemic LAD diastolic peak velocity (hDPV) was used as a surrogate of volumetric coronary flow. The increase in coronary flow was evaluated by the metric of % hDPV-increase defined by 100× (post-PCI hDPV-pre-PCI hDPV)/pre-PCI hDPV. The two groups divided by the median value of % hDPV-increase were compared, and the determinants of a significant coronary flow increase defined as more than the median % hDPV-increase were explored. After PCI, FFR values improved in all cases. hDPV significantly increased from 53.0 to 76.0 mm/s (P < 0.01) and the median % hDPV-increase was 45%, while hDPV decreased in 10 patients. On multivariable analysis, pre-PCI FFR and hDPV were independent predictors of a significant coronary flow increase. Preprocedural TDE-derived hDPV provided significant improvement of identification of lesions that benefit from revascularisation with respect to significant coronary flow increase.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Medical Therapy in the Treatment of Stable Coronary Artery Disease: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Contemporary Randomized Controlled Trials.

The net clinical benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with medical therapy (MT) alone for the treatment of stable coronary artery disease (CAD) remains uncertain. We conducted an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare PCI with MT for the treatment of patients with stable CAD. RCTs of PCI vs MT in patients with stable CAD were identified from MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and manual search of bibliographies to March 2020. Study-specific risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled for the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), revascularizations, rehospitalizations, or stroke and its individual components. Eleven unique RCTs comprising 9629 patients were included. PCI reduced the overall risk of the composite outcome of allcause mortality, MI, revascularizations, rehospitalizations, or stroke (RR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46-0.87); unplanned revascularization (RR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.77); and fatal MI (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.52-0.92). There were no significant differences in overall risk of all-cause mortality and other cardiovascular events comparing PCI with MT. The composite outcome of all-cause mortality, MI, revascularizations, rehospitalizations, or stroke was reduced with PCI at 2-5 years. In patients with stable CAD, overall, short-term and intermediate-term risks of all-cause mortality are not significantly different between PCI and MT. However, PCI may reduce the overall and intermediate-term risk of the combined outcome of all-cause mortality, MI, revascularizations, rehospitalizations, or stroke.

Risks and benefits of percutaneous coronary intervention in spontaneous coronary artery dissection

ObjectiveTo investigate percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) practice in an international cohort of patients with spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD). To explore factors associated with complications and study angiographic and longer...

Improving Quality of Life with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Chronic Coronary Syndrome Patients with SYNTAX Score of More than 22

Background : The benefit of PCI to improve quality of life (QoL) in chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) is still unclear. Objectives : This study aimed to assess the benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in improving QoL among CCS patients receiving OMT. Methods : We conducted a retrospective cohort study. CCS patients who underwent coronary angiography (CAG) and/or PCI were grouped into OMT plus PCI and OMT groups. The SYNTAX score was used to assess the complexity and severity of coronary artery lesions. The outcome measured was QoL assessed using Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) and rehospitalization. Results: A total of 57 patients in the OMT plus PCI group and 49 patients in the OMT group were included. The percentage of patients with good QoL was higher in the OMT plus PCI group than OMT only group (64.5% vs. 35.5%; p = 0.007). The OMT plus PCI group revealed a better activities of daily living (85.11 ± 12.46 vs. 12.46 ± 21.87; p = 0.014) and angina stability (84.32 ± 23.63 vs. 71.81 ± 27.89; p = 0.014) than OMT group. Among patients with SYNTAX scores of more than 22, achievement of good QoL was greater in the OMT plus PCI group than the OMT group (80.8% vs. 45.5%; p = 0.025). Conclusion: PCI improved the QoL in CCS patients treated with OMT. Second, OMT plus PCI improves physical limitation and angina stability. For patients with a SYNTAX score of more than 22, OMT plus PCI was correlated with good QoL achievement.

Late Survival Benefit of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Compared With Medical Therapy in Patients With Coronary Chronic Total Occlusion: A 10-Year Follow-Up Study.

BackgroundAs an initial treatment strategy, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) did not show midterm survival benefits compared with optimal medical therapy (OMT). We sought to evaluate the benefit of PCI compared with OMT in patients with CTO over extended long‐term follow‐up.Methods and ResultsBetween March 2003 and February 2012, 2024 patients with CTO were enrolled in a single‐center registry and followed for ≈10 years. We excluded patients with CTO who underwent coronary artery bypass graft (n=477) and classified patients into the CTO‐PCI group (n=883) or OMT group (n=664) according to initial treatment strategy. Patients with multivessel disease received PCI for obstructive non‐CTO lesions in both groups. In the CTO‐PCI group, 699 patients (79.2%) underwent successful revascularization. The CTO‐PCI group had a lower 10‐year rate of cardiac death (10.4% versus 22.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.44 [95% CI, 0.32–0.59]; P<0.001) than the OMT group. After propensity score matching analyses, the CTO‐PCI group had a lower 10‐year rate of cardiac death (13.6% versus 20.8%; HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.45–0.91]; P=0.01) than the OMT group. The relative reduction in cardiac death at 10 years was mainly driven by a relative reduction between 3 and 10 years (8.3% versus 16.6%; HR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.27–0.71]; P<0.001) but not at 3 years (5.7% versus 5.0%; HR, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.63–2.00]; P=0.71). The beneficial effects of CTO‐PCI were consistent among subgroups.ConclusionsAs an initial treatment strategy, CTO‐PCI might reduce late cardiac death compared with OMT in patients with CTO. Extended follow‐up of randomized trials may confirm the findings of the present study.

Abstract 14143: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Very Elderly Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Grafts Presenting With Acute Myocardial Infarction

Introduction: There is limited data on the benefits of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in very elderly patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG). Therefore, we sought to evaluate the outcomes of PCI versus medical therapy alone in very elderly patients with prior CABG who present with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods: Retrospective study of patients ≥ 80 years old with prior CABG who underwent invasive coronary angiography for AMI at Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center between June 2009 and February 2019. Patients were treated with PCI or medical therapy alone. Inverse Probability Treatment of Weighting (IPTW) was used to balance baseline characteristics between treatment groups and cox proportional hazard regression analysis was utilized. Outcomes evaluated were all-cause mortality and non-fatal MI. Results: There were 347 patients (average age 83.6±3.2 years, 18% female) analyzed. Of these 167 (48%) underwent PCI. Compared to medical therapy alone, the PCI group was more likely to have left main disease (15% vs 2.8%, p&lt;0.01) and higher ejection fraction (48.0± vs 44.4± %, p=0.02); but less likely to have history of atrial fibrillation (31.7% vs 45.6%, p&lt;0.01). To adjust for significant differences between groups, IPTW was utilized to balance covariates (all p&gt;0.05). At a median follow-up of 27.6 months (interquartile range 9.7-52 months), there were no significant differences in all-cause mortality (Hazard Ratio [HR] 0.93, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.88-1.32, p=0.5), and non-fatal MI (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72-1.26, p=0.7). Conclusion: PCI did not improve clinical outcomes over medical therapy alone in very elderly patients ≥ 80 years of age with prior CABG presenting with AMI. Further studies are needed to delineate the role of PCI in this high-risk unique population.

Abstract 15071: Effect of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Death and Myocardial Infarction in Patients Withstable Coronary Artery Disease and Inducible Ischemia

Introduction: There has been a continuous debate about the survival benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the management of patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and moderate to severe ischemia. To address this, we performed a meta-analysis of RCTs comparing PCI plus MT vs. MT alone in stable CAD patients to evaluate endpoints of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, and MI in a larger cohort of patients with objective evidence of myocardial ischemia. Methods: An electronic database search was conducted for RCTs that compared PCI on top of MT versus MT alone. A random effects model was used to calculate relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: A total of 7 RCTs with 10,043 patients with a mean age of 62.54 ± 1.56 years and a median follow up of 3.9 years were identified. Among patients with (CAD) and moderate to severe ischemia by stress testing, PCI didn’t show any benefit for the primary outcome of all-cause mortality compared to MT(RR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.646-1.12; p= 0.639). There was also no benefit in cardiovascular (CV) death (RR = 0.88 ; 95% CI 0.71-1.09; p =0.18) or myocardial infarction (MI) (RR = 0.271 ; 95% CI 0.782-1.087; P =0.327) in the PCI group as compared to MT. Conclusions: Among patients with (CAD) and evidence of moderate to severe ischemia by stress testing, PCI on top of MT appears to add no mortality benefit as compared to with MT alone.