Randomized Trial of Stents Versus Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease 5-Year Outcomes of the PRECOMBAT Study

AbstractBackgroundIn a previous randomized trial, we found that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was not inferior to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis at 1 year.ObjectivesThis study sought to determine the 5-year outcomes of PCI compared with CABG for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis.MethodsWe randomly assigned 600 patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis to undergo PCI with a sirolimus-eluting stent (n = 300) or CABG (n = 300). The primary endpoint was a major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (MACCE: a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization) and compared on an intention-to-treat basis.ResultsAt 5 years, MACCE occurred in 52 patients in the PCI group and 42 patients in the CABG group (cumulative event rates of 17.5% and 14.3%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84 to 1.90; p = 0.26). The 2 groups did not differ significantly in terms of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or stroke as well as their composite (8.4% and 9.6%; HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.52; p = 0.66). Ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization occurred more frequently in the PCI group than in the CABG group (11.4% and 5.5%, respectively; HR: 2.11; 95% CI: 1.16 to 3.84; p = 0.012).ConclusionsDuring 5 years of follow-up, our study did not show significant difference regarding the rate of MACCE between patients who underwent PCI with a sirolimus-eluting stent and those who underwent CABG. However, considering the limited power of our study, our results should be interpreted with caution. (Bypass Surgery Versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease [PRECOMBAT]; NCT00422968

Sirolimus- Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for the Treatment of Coronary Bifurcations Results From the COBIS (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting) Registry

ObjectivesWe aimed to compare the long-term clinical outcomes of patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) for coronary bifurcation lesions.BackgroundThere are limited data regarding comparisons of SES and PES for the treatment of bifurcation lesions.MethodsPatients who received percutaneous coronary intervention for non-left main bifurcation lesions were enrolled from 16 centers in Korea between January 2004 and June 2006. We compared major adverse cardiac events (MACE [cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization]) between the SES and PES groups in patients overall and in 407 patient pairs generated by propensity-score matching.ResultsWe evaluated 1,033 patients with bifurcation lesions treated with SES and 562 patients treated with PES. The median follow-up duration was 22 months. Treatment with SES was associated with a lower incidence of MACE (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32 to 0.89, p < 0.01) and target lesion revascularization (HR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.31 to 0.97, p = 0.02), but not of cardiac death (HR: 2.77, 95% CI: 0.40 to 18.99, p = 0.62) and cardiac death or myocardial infarction (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.38 to 2.49, p = 0.94). After propensity-score matching, patients with SES still had fewer MACE and target lesion revascularization incidences than did patients with PES (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.30 to 0.91, p = 0.02, and HR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.91, p = 0.02, respectively). There was no significant difference in the occurrences of stent thrombosis between the groups (0.7% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.94).ConclusionsIn patients with bifurcation lesions, the use of SES resulted in better long-term outcomes than did the use of PES, primarily by decreasing the rate of repeat revascularization. (Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry in South Korea [COBIS]; NCT00851526

New prognostic scoring system for mortality in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis by modifying the gender, age, and physiology model with desaturation during the six-minute walk test

BackgroundIdiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive fibrosing interstitial lung disease (ILD) with variable and heterogeneous clinical course. The GAP (gender, age, and physiology) model had been used to predict mortality in patients with IPF, but does not contain exercise capacity. Therefore, our aim in this study was to develop new prognostic scoring system in the Korea IPF Cohort (KICO) registry.Materials and methodsThis is a retrospective study of Korean patients with IPF in KICO registry from June 2016 to August 2021. We developed new scoring system (the GAP6) based on the GAP model adding nadir saturation of percutaneous oxygen (SpO2) during six-minute walk test (6MWT) in the KICO registry and compared the efficacy of the GAP and the GAP6 model.ResultsAmong 2,412 patients in KICO registry, 966 patients were enrolled. The GAP6 model showed significant prognostic value for mortality between each stage [HR Stage II vs. Stage I = 2.89 (95% CI = 2.38–3.51), HR Stage III vs. Stage II = 2.68 (95% CI = 1.60–4.51)]. In comparison the model performance with area under curve (AUC) using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, the GAP6 model showed a significant improvement for predicting mortality than the GAP model (AUC the GAP vs. the GAP6, 0.646 vs. 0.671, p &lt; 0.0019). Also, the C-index values slightly improved from 0.674 to 0.691 for mortality.ConclusionThe GAP6 model adding nadir SpO2 during 6WMT for an indicator of functional capacity improves prediction ability with C-index and AUC. Additional multinational study is needed to confirm these finding and validate the applicability and accuracy of this risk assessment system