Classification of coronary artery bifurcation lesions and treatments: Time for a consensus!

Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of coronary bifurcation lesions remains a subject of debate. Many studies have been published in this setting. They are often small scale and display methodological flaws and other shortcomings such as inaccurate designation of lesions, heterogeneity, and inadequate description of techniques implemented. Methods: The aim is to propose a consensus established by the European Bifurcation Club (EBC), on the definition and classification of bifurcation lesions and treatments implemented with the purpose of allowing comparisons between techniques in various anatomical and clinical settings. Results: A bifurcation lesion is a coronary artery narrowing occurring adjacent to, and/or involving, the origin of a significant side branch. The simple lesion classification proposed by Medina has been adopted. To analyze the outcomes of different techniques by intention to treat, it is necessary to clearly define which vessel is the distal main branch and which is (are) the side branche(s) and give each branch a distinct name. Each segment of the bifurcation has been named following the same pattern as the Medina classification. The classification of the techniques (MADS: Main, Across, Distal, Side) is based on the manner in which the first stent has been implanted. A visual presentation of PCI techniques and devices used should allow the development of a software describing quickly and accurately the procedure performed. Conclusion: The EBC proposes a new classification of bifurcation lesions and their treatments to permit accurate comparisons of well described techniques in homogeneous lesion groups. © 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc

Changing treatment patterns for coronary artery revascularization in Canada: the projected impact of drug eluting stents

BACKGROUND: To evaluate current treatment patterns for coronary artery revascularization in Canada and explore the potential impact of drug eluting stents (DES) on these treatment patterns. METHODS: Eleven cardiologists at multiple Canadian academic centers completed a questionnaire on coronary artery revascularization rates and treatment patterns. RESULTS: Participating physicians indicated slightly higher rates of PTCA, CABG, and stent implantation than reported in CCN publications. Participants estimated that 24% of all patients currently receiving bare metal stents (BMS) would receive DES in the first year following DES approval in Canada, although there was a large range of estimates around this value (5% to 65%). By the fifth year following DES approval, it was estimated that 85% of BMS patients would instead receive DES. Among diabetic patients, estimates ranged from 43% in the first year following approval to 91% in the fifth year. For all patients currently receiving CABG, mean use of DES instead was estimated at 12% in the first year to 42% at five years; rates among diabetic patients currently undergoing CABG were 17% in the first year to 49% in the fifth year. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest a continued increase in revascularization procedures in Canada. Based on the panel's responses, it is likely that a trend away from CABG towards PTCA will continue in Canada, and will be augmented by the availability of DES as a treatment option. The availability of DES as a treatment option in Canada may change the threshold at which revascularization procedures are considered

Percutaneous coronary intervention in the occluded artery trial: procedural success, hazard, and outcomes over 5 years.

BACKGROUND: The Occluded Artery Trial (OAT) was a 2,201-patient randomized clinical trial comparing routine stent-based percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus optimal medical therapy alone in stable myocardial infarction (MI) survivors with persistent infarct-related artery occlusion identified day 3 to 28 post MI. Intent-to-treat analysis showed no difference between strategies with respect to the incidence of new class IV congestive heart failure, MI, or death. The influence of PCI failure, procedural hazard, and crossover on trial results has not been reported. METHODS: Study angiograms were analyzed and adjudicated centrally. Factors associated with PCI failure were examined. Time-to-event analysis using the OAT primary outcome was performed by PCI success status. Landmark analysis (up to and beyond 30 days) partitioned early hazard versus late outcome according to treatment received. RESULTS: Percutaneous coronary intervention was adjudicated successful in >87%. Percutaneous coronary intervention failure rates were similar in US and non-US sites, and did not significantly influence outcome at 60 months (hazard ratio for success vs fail 0.79, 99% CI 0.45-1.40, P = .29). Partitioning of early procedural hazard revealed no late benefit for PCI (hazard ratio for PCI success vs medical therapy alone 1.06, 99% CI 0.75-1.50, P = .66). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous coronary intervention failure and complication rates in the OAT were low. Neither PCI failure nor early procedural hazard substantively influenced the primary trial results

2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease

The recommendations listed in this document are, whenever possible, evidence based. An extensive evidence review was conducted as the document was compiled through December 2008. Repeated literature searches were performed by the guideline development staff and writing committee members as new issues were considered. New clinical trials published in peer-reviewed journals and articles through December 2011 were also reviewed and incorporated when relevant. Furthermore, because of the extended development time period for this guideline, peer review comments indicated that the sections focused on imaging technologies required additional updating, which occurred during 2011. Therefore, the evidence review for the imaging sections includes published literature through December 2011