Unprotected Left Main Disease Research Articles

Intravascular ultrasound-guided versus angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score-matched studies

Intravascular ultrasound-guided versus angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score-matched studies

Intravascular Imaging-Guided Versus Coronary Angiography-Guided Complex PCI: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Intravascular Imaging-Guided Versus Coronary Angiography-Guided Complex PCI: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Real-World Experience and Outcomes with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Protected versus Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Insights from the VA CART Program

Practice patterns and outcomes of protected left main (PLM) and unprotected left main (ULM) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are not well defined in contemporary US clinical practice. Data collected from all Veteran Affairs (VA) catheterization laboratories participating in the Clinical Assessment Reporting and Tracking Program between 2009 and 2019. The analysis included 4,351 patients undergoing left main PCI, of which 1,306 pairs of PLM and ULM PCI were included in a propensity matched cohort. Selected temporal trends were also assessed. The primary outcome was MACE outcomes at 1-year, which was defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, rehospitalization for myocardial infarction (MI), rehospitalization for stroke or urgent revascularization. ULM PCI patients in comparison to PLM PCI were older (71.5 vs 69.2; P < 0.001), more clinically complex and more likely to present with ACS. In the propensity matched cohort, radial access was used more often for ULM PCI (21% [273] vs. 14% [185], P < 0.001), and ULM PCI was more likely to involve the LM bifurcation (22% vs 14%; P = 0.003) and require mechanical circulatory support (10% [134] vs 1% [17]; P <0.001). One-year MACE occurred more frequently with ULM PCI compared to PLM PCI (22% [289] vs. 16% [215]; P = < 0.001) and all-cause mortality was also higher (16% [213] vs. 10% [125]; P = < 0.001). In the matched cohort there was a low incidence of rehospitalization for MI (4% [48] ULM vs. 4% [48] PLM; P = 1.000) or revascularization (7% [94] ULM vs. 6% [84] PLM; P = 0.485). In this real-world experience patients undergoing PLM PCI had better one-year outcomes than those undergoing ULM PCI, but in both groups there was a high rate of mortality and MACE at one-year despite a relatively low rate of MI or revascularization.•What is known?○In contemporary practice, the use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for left main coronary artery disease has increased.○Clinical trials have demonstrated that left main PCI can be performed safely, but observational studies have shown that patients who undergo left main PCI are older and with more co-morbid conditions than trial populations.•What the study adds?○In a large multi-center sample from the United States Department of Veterans Affairs, there has been increasing use of left main PCI in patients who have not undergone prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG).○Compared to patients with prior CABG who underwent left main PCI, those who underwent left main PCI without prior CABG had a higher rate of major adverse cardiovascular events and all cause death at 12 months.○While there was an overall low rate of rehospitalization for myocardial infarction or revascularization, there was a higher 12-month incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events in this real-world population compared to clinical trial populations.

Long-term impact of intravascular ultrasound-guidance for percutaneous coronary intervention on unprotected left main. The IMPACTUS-LM, an observational, multicentric study

IntroductionThe potential benefit on long term outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) on Unprotected Left Main (ULM) driven by IntraVascular UltraSound (IVUS) remains to be defined. MethodsIMPACTUS LM-PCI is an observational, multicenter study that enrolled consecutive patients with ULM disease undergoing coronary angioplasty in 13 European high-volume centers from January 2002 to December 2015. Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACEs) a composite of cardiovascular (CV) death, target vessel revascularization (TVR) and myocardial infarction (MI) were the primary endpoints, while its single components along with all cause death the secondary ones. Results627 patients with ULM disease were enrolled, 213 patients (34%) underwent IVUS-guided PCI while 414 (66%) angioguided PCI. Patients in the two cohorts had similar prevalence of risk factors except for active smoking and clinical presentation. During a median follow-up of 7.5 years, 47 (22%) patients in the IVUS group and 211 (51%) in the angio-guided group underwent the primary endpoint (HR 0.42; 95% CI [0.31–0.58] p < 0.001). After multivariate adjustment, IVUS was significantly associated with a reduced incidence of the primary endpoint (adj HR 0.39; 95% CI [0.23–0.64], p < 0.001), mainly driven by a reduction of TVR (ad HR 0.30, 95% CI [0.15–0.62], p = 0.001) and of all-cause death (adj HR 0.47, 95% CI [0.28–0.82], p = 0.008). IVUS use, age, diabetes, side branch stenosis, DES and creatinine at admission were independent predictors of MACE. ConclusionsIn patients undergoing ULM PCI, the use of IVUS was associated with a reduced risk at long-term follow-up of MACE, all-cause death and subsequent revascularization.

Long Term Outcome of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Unprotected Left Main Disease

Background: The management of unprotected left main coronary artery disease (LM CAD) poses a significant clinical challenge. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) have been extensively compared, with PCI emerging as a viable option for specific patient subsets. Advancements in interventional cardiology, including drug-eluting stents and intravascular ultrasound, have improved PCI outcomes, yet long-term efficacy remains a subject of investigation. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the long-term outcomes of PCI in patients with unprotected LM CAD, focusing on all-cause mortality, cardiac deaths, myocardial infarction, revascularization, and stroke. Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted at the Peshawar Institute of Cardiology, KPK, from November 2022 to October 2023. A total of 120 patients aged 55-70 years with LM disease undergoing PCI were included. Long-term outcomes were assessed after five years. Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 23, focusing on frequency and association of outcomes with gender. Results: The study observed all-cause mortality in 15.0% (n=18) of the patients, cardiovascular mortality in 6.7% (n=8), myocardial infarction in 7.5% (n=9), revascularization in 14.2% (n=17), and stroke in 4.2% (n=5). Gender analysis revealed no significant difference in all-cause mortality (P=0.73), with a notable gender disparity in cardiovascular mortality favoring females (P=0.04). Revascularization and stroke rates did not significantly differ by gender. Conclusion: PCI presents a favorable and safe long-term treatment option for patients with unprotected LM CAD, with significant outcomes in terms of mortality, myocardial infarction, revascularization, and stroke. The study supports the continued use of PCI in clinical practice, highlighting the necessity for further comparative research with CABG to optimize patient outcomes.

Optimal Minimal Stent Area and Impact of Stent Underexpansion in Left Main Up-Front 2-Stent Strategy.

We previously reported the use of minimal stent area to predict angiographic in-stent restenosis after drug-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main (LM) disease. We aimed to evaluate the optimal minimal stent area criteria for up-front LM 2-stenting based on long-term clinical outcomes. We identified 292 consecutive patients with LM bifurcation stenosis who were treated using the crush technique. The final minimal stent area was measured in the ostial left anterior descending artery (LAD), ostial left circumflex artery (LCX), and distal LM. The primary outcome was 5-year major adverse cardiac events, including all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. The minimal stent area cutoff values that best predicted the 5-year major adverse cardiac events were 11.8 mm2 for distal LM (area under the curve, 0.57; P=0.15), 8.3 mm2 for LAD ostium (area under the curve, 0.62; P=0.02), and 5.7 mm2 for LCX ostium (area under the curve, 0.64; P=0.01). Using these criteria, the risk of 5-year major adverse cardiac events was significantly associated with stent underexpansion in the LAD ostium (hazard ratio, 3.14; [95% CI, 1.23-8.06]; P=0.02) and LCX ostium (hazard ratio, 2.60 [95% CI, 1.11-6.07]; P=0.03) but not in the distal LM (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.34-1.91]; P=0.63). Patients with stent underexpansion in both ostial LAD and LCX had a significantly higher rate of 5-year major adverse cardiac events than those with no or 1 underexpanded stent of either ostium (P<0.01). Stent underexpansion in the LAD and LCX ostium was significantly associated with long-term outcomes in patients who underwent up-front 2-stenting for LM bifurcation stenosis.

Guiding Intervention for Complex Coronary Lesions by Optical Coherence Tomography or Intravascular Ultrasound

BackgroundOptical coherence tomography (OCT) and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) have shown comparable outcomes in guiding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, their comparative effectiveness in complex coronary artery lesions remains unclear. ObjectivesThis study compared the effectiveness and safety of OCT-guided vs IVUS-guided PCI for complex coronary artery lesions. MethodsThis was a prespecified, main subgroup analysis of complex coronary artery lesions in the OCTIVUS (Optical Coherence Tomography Versus Intravascular Ultrasound Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial, which included unprotected left main disease, bifurcation disease, an aorto-ostial lesion, a chronic total occlusion, a severely calcified lesion, an in-stent restenotic lesion, a diffuse long lesion, or multivessel PCI. The primary endpoint was a composite of death from cardiac causes, target vessel–related myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization. ResultsIn 2,008 randomized patients, 1,475 (73.5%) underwent imaging-guided PCI for complex coronary artery lesions; 719 (48.7%) received OCT-guided and 756 (51.3%) IVUS-guided PCI. At a median follow-up of 2.0 years, primary endpoint event had occurred in 47 patients (6.5%) in the OCT-guided group and in 56 patients (7.4%) in the IVUS-guided group (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.59-1.29; P = 0.50). These findings were consistent in adjusted analyses. The incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy was similar between the 2 groups (1.9% vs 1.5%; P = 0.46). The incidence of major procedural complications was lower in the OCT-guided group than in the IVUS-guided group (1.7% vs 3.4%; P = 0.03). ConclusionsAmong patients with complex coronary artery lesions, OCT-guided PCI showed a similar risk of primary composite event of death from cardiac causes, target vessel–related myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization as compared with IVUS-guided PCI. (Optical Coherence Tomography Versus Intravascular Ultrasound Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [OCTIVUS]; NCT03394079)

Predictors of Adverse Outcome in High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Interventions Patients.

Identifying high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients is challenging. We aimed to evaluate which high-risk patients are prone to adverse events. We performed a retrospective study including consecutive high-risk PCIs from 2005 to 2018 in a large tertiary medical centre. Patients with unprotected left main (LM) disease, last patent coronary vessel, or 3-vessel coronary artery disease with left ventricular ejection fraction < 35% were included. A predictive 30-day major adverse cardiac events (MACE) score consisting of any myocardial infarction, all-cause death, or target-vessel revascularisation was constructed. From 2005 to 2018, a total of 1890 patients who underwent PCI met the predefined high-risk PCI criteria. Mortality rate was 8.8% at 30 days and 20.7% at 1 year, and 30-day MACE rate was 14.2% and 33.5% at 1 year. Predictors of short-term MACE were New York Heart Association functional class (NYHA) 4 (hazard ratio [HR] 6.65; P<0.001), systolic blood pressure (SBP) < 90 mm Hg (HR 4.93; P<0.001), creatinine > 1.3 mg/dL (HR 3.57; P< 0.001), hemoglobin< 11.0 g/dL (HR 3.07; P < 0.001), pulmonary artery systolic pressure> 50 mm Hg (HR 2.06; P<0.001), atrial fibrillation (HR 1.74; P<0.001), and LM disease (HR 2.04; P<0.001) or last patent vessel (HR 1.70; P= 0.002). A score constructed from these parameters reached a sensitivity of 90% and a specificity of 81% with areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.92 for MACE and 0.94 with 89% sensitivity and 87% specificity for all-cause mortality. Specific features such as LM lesion or last patent conduit, pulmonary hypertension, atrial fibrillation, anemia, and renal failure, along with low SBP and NYHA 4, aid risk stratification and consideration of further treatment measures.

The impact of left circumflex coronary artery ostium stenosis on outcomes for patients after percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main disease.

The impact of left circumflex coronary artery (LCX) ostium atherosclerosis in left main coronary artery (LM) bifurcation disease is not well-known. The study aimed to assess whether the involvement of LCX ostium carries prognostic implications in patients undergoing unprotected LM percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Consecutive 564 patients with unprotected LM (ULMCA) disease who underwent LM PCI between January 2015 and February 2021, with at least 1 year of available follow-up were included in the study. The first group was composed of 145 patients with ULMCA disease with LCX ostium stenosis, and the second group consisted of 419 patients with ULMCA disease without LCX ostium stenosis. Patients in the group with ULMCA disease with LCX ostium stenosis were significantly older and had more comorbidities. The two-stent technique was used more often in the group with LCX ostium stenosis (62.8% vs. 14.6%; P <0.001). During 7-year follow-up, all-cause mortality did not differ significantly between groups with and without LCX ostium stenosis (P = 0.50). The use of one-stent or two-stent technique also did not impact mortality in patients with LCX ostial lesions (P = 0.75). Long-term mortality subanalysis for three groups of patients: (1) patients with LM plus LCX ostium stenosis; (2) LM plus left anterior descending artery (LAD) ostium stenosis; (3) LM plus LCX ostium plus LAD ostium stenosis also did not differ significantly (P = 0.63). LCX ostium involvement in LM disease PCI is not associated with adverse long-term outcomes, which is highly beneficial for the Heart Team's decision-making process.

Clinical Outcomes and Predictors of All-Cause Mortality After Complex High-Risk and Indicated Revascularization Using Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

The concept of complex and high-risk indicated procedures using percutaneous coronary intervention (CHIP-PCI) has recently been defined. However, few studies have investigated the prognosis of patients after CHIP-PCI. We enrolled 322 consecutive patients who underwent CHIP-PCI. CHIP-PCI was defined as a procedure satisfying at least one criterion each for both patient and procedure characteristics, as follows: patient characteristics [age ≥ 75 years old, low left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), diabetes mellitus, acute coronary syndrome, previous coronary artery bypass surgery, peripheral arterial disease, severe chronic kidney disease (CKD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and severe valvular disease] and procedure characteristics [unprotected left main disease, degenerated saphenous or radial artery grafts, severely calcified lesions, last patent conduit, chronic total occlusions, multivessel disease, and use of mechanical circulatory support]. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates following CHIP-PCI was 93.8%, 89.2%, and 85.4%, respectively. Moreover, on Cox multivariate hazard analysis, age (≥ 75 years old) (hazard ratio: 4.01, 95% confidence interval: 1.92-8.38, P < 0.01), COPD (hazard ratio: 2.95, 95% confidence interval: 1.38-6.32, P < 0.01), low LVEF (hazard ratio: 3.35, 95% confidence interval: 1.55-7.22, P < 0.01), severe CKD (hazard ratio: 3.02, 95% confidence interval: 1.44-6.36, P < 0.01), and use of mechanical circulatory support (hazard ratio: 5.97, 95% confidence interval: 2.72-13.10, P < 0.01) remained significant predictors of mortality. In conclusion, we revealed the clinical outcomes after CHIP-PCI. The presence of advanced age, COPD, low LVEF, severe CKD, and mechanical circulatory support use might lead to worse clinical outcomes.

Real-world long-term survival after non-emergent percutaneous coronary intervention to unprotected left main coronary artery — From the Melbourne Interventional Group (MIG) registry

BackgroundCurrent evidence suggests that percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main coronary artery disease (LMPCI) in selected patients is a safe alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting. However, real-world long-term survival data is limited. MethodsWe analyzed 24,644 patients from the MIG (Melbourne Interventional Group) registry between 2005 and 2020. We compared baseline clinical and procedural characteristics, in-hospital and 30-day outcomes, and long-term survival between unprotected LMPCI and non-LMPCI among patients without ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or cardiac arrest. ResultsUnprotected LMPCI patients (n = 185) were significantly older (mean age 72.0 vs. 64.6 years, p < 0.001), had higher prevalence of impaired ejection fraction (EF <50 %; 27.3 % vs. 14.9 %, p < 0.001) and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 ml/min/1.73m2 (40.9 % vs. 21.5 %, p < 0.001), and had greater use of intravascular ultrasound (21 % vs. 1 %, p < 0.001) and drug-eluting stents (p < 0.001). LMPCI was associated with longer hospital stay (4 days vs. 2 days, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in other in-hospital outcomes, 30-day mortality (0.6 % vs. 0.6 %, p = 0.90), and major adverse cardiac events (1.7 % vs. 3 %, p = 0.28). Although the unadjusted Kaplan-Meier survival to 8 years was significantly less with LMPCI compared to non-LMPCI (p < 0.01), LMPCI was not a predictor of long-term survival up to 8 years after Cox regression analysis (HR 0.67, 95 % CI 0.40–1.13, p = 0.13). ConclusionIn this study, non-emergent unprotected LMPCI was uncommonly performed, and IVUS was underutilized. Despite greater co-morbidities, LMPCI patients had comparable 30-day outcomes to non-LMPCI, and LMPCI was not an independent predictor of long-term mortality.

Ad Hoc Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Stable Patients With Multivessel or Unprotected Left Main Disease

BackgroundThere is very little information about the use of ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in stable patients with multivessel (MV) disease or unprotected left main (LM) disease patients for whom a heart team approach is recommended. ObjectiveTo identify the extent of ad hoc PCI utilization for patients with multivessel disease or left main disease, and to explore the inter-hospital variation in ad hoc PCI utilization for those patients. MethodsNew York State’s cardiac registries were used to examine the use and variation in use of ad hoc PCI for MV/LM disease as a percentage of all MV/LM PCIs and revascularizations (PCIs plus coronary artery bypass graft procedures) during 2018 to 2019 in New York. ResultsAfter exclusions, 6,425 of the 8,196 stable PCI patients with MV/LM disease (78.4%) underwent ad hoc PCI, ranging from 58.7% for patients with unprotected LM disease to 85.4% for patients with 2-vessel proximal left anterior descending (PLAD) disease. Ad hoc PCIs comprised 35.1% of all revascularizations, ranging from 11.5% for patients with unprotected LM disease to 63.9% for patients with 2-vessel PLAD disease. The risk-adjusted utilization of ad hoc PCI as a percentage of all revascularizations varied widely among hospitals (eg, from 15% in the first quartile to 46% in the last quartile for 3-vessel disease). ConclusionsAd hoc PCIs occur frequently even among patients with MV/LM disease. This is particularly true among patients with 2-vessel PLAD disease. The frequency of ad hoc PCIs is lower but still high among patients with diabetes and low ejection fraction and higher in hospitals without surgery on-site (SOS). Given the magnitude of hospital- and physician-level variation in the use of ad hoc PCIs for such patients, consideration should be given to a systems approach to achieving heart team consultation and shared decision making that is consistent for SOS and non-SOS hospitals.

Six-months clinical and intracoronary imaging follow-up after reverse T and protrusion or double-kissing and crush stenting for the treatment of complex left main bifurcation lesions.

There is a debate regarding the best stent strategy for unprotected distal left main (LM) bifurcation disease. Among two-stent techniques, double-kissing and crush (DKC) is favored in current guidelines but is complex and requires expertise. Reverse T and Protrusion (rTAP) was shown to be a comparable strategy regarding short-term efficacy and safety, but with reduced procedural complexity. To compare rTAP vs. DKC by optical coherence tomography (OCT) on the intermediate term. 52 consecutive patients with complex unprotected LM stenoses (Medina 0,1,1 or 1,1,1) were randomized to either DKC or rTAP and followed-up for a median of 189[180-263] days for clinical and OCT outcomes. At follow-up OCT showed similar change in the side branch (SB) ostial area (primary endpoint). The confluence polygon showed a higher percentage of malapposed stent struts in the rTAP group that did not reach statistical significance (rTAP: 9.7[4.4-18.3] % vs. DKC: 3[0.07-10.9] %; p = 0.064). It also showed a trend towards larger neointimal area relative to the stent area (DKC: 8.8 [6.9 to 13.4] % vs. rTAP: 6.5 [3.9 to 8.9] %; p = 0.07), and smaller luminal area (DKC: 9.54[8.09-11.07] mm2 vs. rTAP: 11.21[9.53-12.42] mm²; p = 0.09) in the DKC group. The minimum luminal area in the parent vessel distal to the bifurcation was significantly smaller in the DKC group (DKC: 4.64 [3.64 to 5.34] mm² vs. rTAP: 6.76 [5.20 to 7.29] mm²; p = 0.03). This segment also showed a trend for smaller stent areas (p = 0.05 to 0.09), and a bigger neointimal area relative to the stent area (DKC: 8.94 [5.43 to 10.5]% vs. rTAP: 4.75 [0.08 to 8.5]%; p = 0.06) in the DKC patients. The incidence of clinical events was comparably low in both groups. At 6-months, OCT showed a similar change in the SB ostial area (primary endpoint) in rTAP compared to DKC. There was also a trend for smaller luminal areas in the confluence polygon and the distal parent vessel, and a larger neointimal area relative to the stent area, in DKC, along with a tendency for more malapposed stent struts in rTAP. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03714750, identifier: NCT03714750.

Early experience of intravascular lithotripsy in unprotected calcified left main coronary artery disease

BackgroundTreatment of unprotected severely calcified left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease is a complex interventional procedure. Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) and rotational atherectomy (RA) are safe and effective methods of treating coronary calcification in the non-LMCA setting. This retrospective analysis assessed the feasibility of IVL versus RA in unprotected LMCA disease. MethodsWe analyzed IVL and RA procedures performed at a large tertiary hospital in the Northeast of England from January 1, 2019 to April 31, 2022. Major safety and efficacy endpoints were procedural and angiographic success, defined by stent delivery with <50 % residual stenosis and without clinical or angiographic complications, respectively. Another important clinical endpoint was the composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 1 year. ResultsFrom 242 patients, 44 had LMCA IVL, 81 had LMCA RA and 117 had non-LMCA IVL. Patients with LMCA disease were older and more likely to have aortic stenosis. IVL was a second-line or bailout technique in 86.4 % LMCA and 92.2 % non-LMCA cases. Procedural and angiographic success rates were ≥ 84 % across all groups (p > 0.05). In 3 LMCA IVL and 3 LMCA RA cases arrhythmias and cardiac tamponade complicated the procedures respectively. At 1 year, MACE occurred in 10/44 (22.7 %) LMCA IVL, 16/81 (19.8 %) LMCA RA and 25/117 (21.4 %) cases (p > 0.05). ConclusionIn our single center retrospective analysis, IVL is feasible in unprotected calcified LMCA as a second-line and third-line adjuvant calcium modification technique. Its use in unprotected calcified LMCA disease should be formalized with the undertaking of large randomized controlled trials.

Unprotected Left Main Bifurcation Stenting in Acute Coronary Syndromes: Two-Stent Technique versus One-Stent Technique.

There is little evidence guiding the choice between a one-stent and a two-stent approach in unprotected distal left main coronary artery disease (UDLMCAD) presenting as acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We aim to compare these two techniques in an unselected ACS group. We conducted a single center retrospective observational study, that included all patients with UDLMCAD and ACS undergoing PCI between 2014 and 2018. Group A underwent PCI with a one-stent technique (n = 41, 58.6%), Group B with a two-stent technique (n = 29, 41.4%). A total of 70 patients were included, with a median age of 63 years, including n = 12 (17.1%) with cardiogenic shock. There were no differences between Group A and B in terms of patient characteristics, including SYNTAX score (median 23). The 30-day mortality was 15.7% overall, and was lower in Group B (3.5% vs. 24.4%, p = 0.02). Mortality rate at 4 years was significantly lower in Group B (21.4% vs. 44%), also when adjusted in a multivariable regression model (HR 0.26, p = 0.01). In our study, patients with UDLMCAD and ACS undergoing PCI using a two-stent technique had lower early and midterm mortality compared to one-stent approach, even after adjusting for patient-related or angiographic factors.

Physiology-guided PCI versus CABG for left main coronary artery disease: insights from the DEFINE-LM registry

There have been no studies comparing clinical outcomes of physiology-guided revascularization in patients with unprotected left main coronary disease (ULMD) between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes between PCI and CABG of patients with physiologically significant ULMD. From an international multicenter registry of ULMD patients interrogated with instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), we analyzed data from 151 patients (85 PCI vs. 66 CABG) who underwent revascularization according to the cutoff value of iFR ≤ 0.89. Propensity score matching was employed to adjust for baseline clinical characteristics. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. The secondary endpoints were the individual components of the primary endpoint. Mean age was 66.6 (± 9.2) years, 79.2% male. Mean SYNTAX score was 22.6 (± 8.4) and median iFR was 0.83 (IQR 0.74–0.87). After performing propensity score matching analysis, 48 patients treated with CABG were matched to those who underwent PCI. At a median follow-up period of 2.8 years, the primary endpoint occurred in 8.3% in PCI group and 20.8% in CABG group, respectively (HR 3.80; 95% CI 1.04–13.9; p = 0.043). There was no difference in each component of the primary event (p > 0.05 for all). Within the present study, iFR-guided PCI was associated with lower cardiovascular events rate in patients with ULMD and intermediate SYNTAX score, as compared to CABG.Graphical abstractState-of-the-art PCI vs. CABG for ULMD. Study design and primary endpoint in patients with physiologically significant ULMD. MACE was defined as the composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. The blue line denotes the PCI arm, and the red line denotes the CABG arm. PCI was associated with significantly lower risk of MACE than CABG. CABG: coronary artery bypass grafting; iFR: instantaneous wave-free ratio; MACE: major adverse cardiovascular events; PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention; ULMD: unprotected left main coronary artery disease.

Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Unprotected Left Main Disease: A Single-Center Study

Background: Hemodynamically significant unprotected left main (LM) coronary artery disease is a high-risk clinical condition because of the large area of myocardium at risk, and it requires prompt revascularization. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an appropriate alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for revascularization of unprotected LM disease in patients with low-to-intermediate anatomic complexity or when the patient refuses CABG after adequate counseling by the heart team. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 201 patients receiving left main (LM) provisional one-stent or two-stent procedures, and we assessed the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing unprotected LM PCI. Results: The mean age was 66.5 ± 9.9 years, and 72% were male. The majority of the subjects presented several cardiovascular risk factors, among which arterial hypertension (179 patients, 89.5%) and dyslipidemia (173 patients, 86.5%) were the most frequent. Out of all patients, 162 (81.8%) underwent revascularization by using the one-stent technique, while the two-stent technique was used in 36 patients (18.2%). The median value of fractional flow reserve (FFR) of the side branch was 0.9 [0.85-0.95], and 135 patients (67.1%) showed a value of FFR > 0.8. One hundred nine patients (54.2%) had a stent enhancement side branch length (SESBL) > 2, with median values of 2.5 mm2 [2.1-3]. Regarding angiographic parameters, the LM area as assessed by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or optical coherence tomography (OCT) and the grade of stenosis as assessed by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) were similar between groups. However, patients who required revascularization by using the two-stent technique presented more frequently with intermediate rather than low SYNTAX scores (69.4% vs. 28.4%, p < 0.0001). Also, the same group required kissing balloon inflation (KBI) more frequently (69.4% vs. 30%, p < 0.001). There were no differences regarding the success of revascularization between the use of the one-stent or two-stent technique. FFR was able to predict a SESBL > 2 mm. The cut-off value for FFR to afford the highest degree of sensitivity (74.5%) and specificity (47%) for a SESBL > 2 was >0.86, indicating a moderate accuracy (AUC = 0.61, 95% CI 0.525-0.690, p = 0.036). Conclusions: Unprotected left main PCI is a safe and effective revascularization option amongst a complex and morbid population. There were no differences regarding the success of revascularization between the use of the one-stent or two-stent technique, and there was no significant impact of KBI on side branch FFR measurements but lower side branch FFR values were correlated with angiographic side branch compromise.

Clinical Outcomes of Unprotected Left Main Stem Stenting: An Observational Single-Centre Study

Objectives: To know the clinical outcomes of percutaneous intervention (PCI) with drug eluting stents (DES) in patients with unprotected left main stem disease. Materials and Methods: This single-centre, prospective, observational study was conducted on 133 patients, who underwent PCI using DES to an unprotected LMS at Kuwait teaching Hospital Peshawar, between 2018 to 2022. Patients were followed in OPD and clinics or they were traced through calls at monthly and yearly intervals, after the procedure. A team, which comprised of a cardiac interventionist and a cardiac surgeon, scrutinised patients for the eligibility of either procedure. Ethical Committee approval was granted by the Institutional Ethics committee. Results: At 1month follow up, the composite end point occurred in 13 (11.58%) patients, whereas individual secondary end points including death from all-cause mortality was reported in 5 (4.7%), stroke in 1 (0.9 %), MI in 4 (3.73 %) and repeat vascularisation in 3 (2.25%) patients. The annual incidence of composite end point occurred in 27.58%patients, whereas individual secondary end points including death from all-cause mortality was reported in 10 (8.27%), stroke in 3 (2.25 %), MI in 09 (6.76%) and repeat vascularisation in 11 (10.3%) patients, Conclusion: PCI to LMS can be performed safely in centres having no cardiac surgery backup and newer imaging modalities with results comparable to the centres having the luxury of such facilities, provided that operators are skilled enough with sufficient expertise and knowledge.

Applicability of the EXCEL Trial Criteria to an All-Comers Real-World Cohort of Unprotected Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

The Evaluation of XIENCE versus EXCEL (Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trial is the largest randomized study comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with second-generation drug-eluting stents and bypass surgery in unprotected left main disease (ULMD). Our aim was to assess which proportion of patients from a contemporary all-comer population of ULMD PCI would be eligible for the EXCEL trial and whether these patients show different long-term outcomes than the rest of the ULMD population. A total of 246 consecutive patients underwent ULMD PCI between January 2018 and December 2021 and were retrospectively analyzed. After application of the EXCEL trial inclusion and exclusion criteria, 98 patients (39%) were allocated to the "EXCEL-like" cohort and 148 to the "non-EXCEL-like." Baseline characteristics of the 2 groups were substantially comparable. The mean baseline SYNTAX score was lower in the EXCEL-like patients than the non-EXCEL-like group (20.1 ± 7.1 vs 23.0 ± 11.2, p=0.025), with the latter also showing a higher degree of incomplete revascularization (residual SYNTAX score >8:11% vs 26%, p=0.005). At 1year, the cumulative major adverse cardiovascular and cerebral events rate was 7% for the EXCEL-like and 17% for the non-EXCEL-like patients, respectively (p=0.03). At the last follow-up available, the significant difference in major adverse cardiovascular and cerebral events rate persisted (19% vs 37%, p=0.02) and a significant difference in any unplanned revascularization was also shown (1.5% vs 13%, p=0.04). In conclusion, in a contemporary real-world cohort of ULMD PCI, only a minority of patients could be enrolled in the EXCEL trial; the EXCEL-like patients, in our population, showed less clinical events at long-term follow-up than the cohort of patients who were ineligible for EXCEL, despite comparable baseline cardiovascular profiles; these findings may challenge a broad external applicability of the results of the EXCEL trial in routine clinical activity.

Drug-Coated Balloon vs. Drug-Eluting Stents for De Novo Unprotected Left Main Stem Disease: The SPARTAN-LMS Study.

The objective of this study is to compare the outcomes of patients treated with drug-coated balloons (DCBs) or second-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) for de novo unprotected left main stem (LMS) disease. Previous studies comparing the treatment of LMS disease suggest that the mortality for DES PCI is not worse than CABG. There are limited data from studies investigating the treatment of de novo LMS disease with DCB angioplasty. We compared the all-cause and cardiac mortality of patients treated with paclitaxel DCB to those with second-generation DES for de novo LMS disease from July 2014 to November 2019. Data were analysed using Kaplan-Meier analyses and propensity-matched analyses. A total of 148 patients were treated with either a DCB or DES strategy. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality in the DCB group (19.5%) compared to the DES group (15.9%) (HR 1.42 [0.61-3.32], p = 0.42). Regarding cardiac mortality, 2 (4.9%) were recorded for the DCB group and 7 (6.5%) for the DES group (HR 1.21 [0.31-4.67], p = 0.786); for target vessel myocardial infarction, there were 0 (0%) for the DCB group and 7 (6.5%) for the DES group; and for target lesion revascularisation, there were 3 (7.3%) in the DCB group and 9 (8.3%) in the DES group (HR: 0.89 [0.24-3.30]). p = 0.86. These remained not significant after propensity score matching. We found no difference in the mortality outcomes with DCB angioplasty compared to second-generation DES, with a median follow-up of 33 months. DCB can therefore be regarded as a safe option in the treatment of LMS disease in suitable patients.