Percutaneous Intervention or Bypass Graft for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background. The safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for stable left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) remains controversial.Methods. Digital databases were searched to compare the major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and its components. A random effect model was used to compute an unadjusted odds ratio (OR).Results. A total of 43 studies (37 observational and 6 RCTs) consisting of 29,187 patients (PCI 13,709 and CABG 15,478) were identified. The 30-day rate of MACCE (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.42-0.76;p = 0.0002) and all-cause mortality (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.30-0.91;p = 0.02) was significantly lower in the PCI group. There was no significant difference in the rate of myocardial infarction (MI) (p = 0.17) and revascularization (p = 0.12). At 5 years, CABG was favored due to a significantly lower rate of MACCE (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.18-2.36;p = <0.04), MI (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.35-2.06;p = <0.00001), and revascularization (OR, 2.80; 95% CI, 2.18-3.60;p = <0.00001), respectively. PCI was associated with a lower overall rate of a stroke, while the risk of all-cause mortality was not significantly different between the two groups at 1- (p = 0.75), 5- (p = 0.72), and 10-years (p = 0.20). The Kaplan-Meier curve reconstruction revealed substantial variations over time; the 5-year incidence of MACCE was 38% with CABG, significantly lower than 45% with PCI (p = <0.00001).Conclusion. PCI might offer early safety advantages, while CABG provides greater durability in terms of lower long-term risk of ischemic events. There appears to be an equivalent risk for all-cause mortality

Trend, predictors, and outcomes of combined mitral valve replacement and coronary artery bypass graft in patients with concomitant mitral valve and coronary artery disease: a National Inpatient Sample database analysis.

Aims: Combined mitral valve replacement (MVR) and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) procedures have been the norm for patients with concomitant mitral valve disease (MVD) and coronary artery disease (CAD) with no large-scale data on their safety and efficacy. Methods and results: The National Inpatient Sample database (2002-18) was queried to identify patients undergoing MVR and CABG. The major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and its components were compared using a propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis to calculate adjusted odds ratios (OR). A total of 6 145 694 patients (CABG only 3 971 045, MVR only 1 933 459, MVR + CABG 241 190) were included in crude analysis, while a matched cohort of 724 237 (CABG only 241 436, MVR only 241 611 vs. MVR + CABG 241 190) was selected in PSM analysis. The combined MVR + CABG procedure had significantly higher adjusted odds of MACE [OR 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-1.14 and OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.93-1.99] and in-hospital mortality (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.27-1.31 and OR 2.1, 95% CI 2.05-2.14) compared with CABG alone and MVR alone, respectively. Similarly, the risk of post-procedure bleeding, major bleeding, acute kidney injury, cardiogenic shock, sepsis, need for intra-aortic balloon pump, mean length of stay, and total charges per hospitalization were significantly higher for patients undergoing the combined procedure. These findings remained consistent on yearly trend analysis favouring the isolated CABG and MVR groups. Conclusion: Combined procedure (MVR + CABG) in patients with MVD and CAD appears to be associated with worse in-hospital outcomes, increased mortality, and higher resource utilization compared with isolated CABG and MVR procedures. Randomized controlled trials are needed to determine the relative safety of these procedures in the full spectrum of baseline valvular and angiographic characteristics

Estrogen-Eluting Stents

Coronary stenting is routinely utilized to treat symptomatic obstructive coronary artery disease. However, the efficacy of bare metal coronary stents has been historically limited by restenosis, which is primarily due to excessive neointima formation. Drug-eluting stents (DES) are composed of a stainless steel backbone encompassed by a polymer in which a variety of drugs that inhibit smooth muscle cell proliferation and excessive neointima formation are incorporated. DES have significantly reduced the incidence of restenosis but are also associated with a small (~0.5% per year) but significant risk of late stent thrombosis. In that regard, estrogen-eluting stents have also undergone clinical evaluation in reducing restenosis with the additional potential benefit of enhancing reendothelialization of the stent surface to reduce stent thrombosis. Estrogen directly promotes vasodilatation, enhances endothelial healing, and prevents smooth muscle cell migration and proliferation. Due to these mechanisms, estrogen has been postulated to reduce neointimal hyperplasia without delaying endothelial healing. In animal studies, estrogen treatment was effective in decreasing neointimal hyperplasia after both balloon angioplasty and stenting regardless of the method of drug delivery. The first uncontrolled human study using estrogen-coated stents demonstrated acceptable efficacy in reducing late lumen loss. However, subsequent randomized clinical trials did not show superiority of estrogen-eluting stents over bare metal stents or DES. Further studies are required to determine optimal dose and method of estrogen delivery with coronary stenting and whether this approach will be a viable alternative to the current DES armamentarium

Impact of impaired fractional flow reserve after coronary interventions on outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: FFR is routinely used to guide percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Visual assessment of the angiographic result after PCI has limited efficacy. Even when the angiographic result seems satisfactory FFR after a PCI might be useful for identifying patients with a suboptimal interventional result and higher risk for poor clinical outcome who might benefit from additional procedures. The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate available data of studies that examined clinical outcomes of patients with impaired vs. satisfactory fractional flow reserve (FFR) after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). METHODS: This meta-analysis was carried out according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. The Mantel-Haenszel method using the fixed-effect meta-analysis model was used for combining the results. Studies were identified by searching the literature through mid-January, 2016, using the following search terms: fractional flow reserve, coronary circulation, after, percutaneous coronary intervention, balloon angioplasty, stent implantation, and stenting. Primary endpoint was the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Secondary endpoints included rates of death, myocardial infarction (MI), repeated revascularisation. RESULTS: Eight relevant studies were found including a total of 1337 patients. Of those, 492 (36.8 %) had an impaired FFR after PCI, and 853 (63.2 %) had a satisfactory FFR after PCI. Odds ratios indicated that a low FFR following PCI was associated with an impaired outcome: major adverse cardiac events (MACE, OR: 4.95, 95 % confidence interval [CI]: 3.39–7.22, p <0.001); death (OR: 3.23, 95 % CI: 1.19–8.76, p = 0.022); myocardial infarction (OR: 13.83, 95 % CI: 4.75–40.24, p <0.0001) and repeated revascularisation (OR: 4.42, 95 % CI: 2.73–7.15, p <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to a satisfactory FFR, a persistently low FFR following PCI is associated with a worse clinical outcome. Prospective studies are needed to identify underlying causes, determine an optimal threshold for post-PCI FFR, and clarify whether simple additional procedures can influence the post-PCI FFR and clinical outcome. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12872-016-0355-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users