9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance Improves the Long-term Prognosis in Patients with Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This study compared the long term outcomes in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease who underwent stenting under the guidance of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or conventional angiography at a large single center. The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause death and myocardial infarction (MI) at 3 years. Target vessel revascularization (TVR) at 3 years was one of the secondary outcomes. Between January 2004 and December 2011, a total of 1,899 patients who underwent IVUS-guided (n = 713, 37.5%) or conventional angiography-guided (n = 1186, 62.5%) stenting were included. At 3 years, the unadjusted primary outcome trended lower in the IVUS-guided group versus the angiography-guided (6.9% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.22) although the TVR was similar between two groups (6.0% vs. 6.0%, p = 0.97). However, after adjustment for differences in baseline risk factors, IVUS-guidance was associated with significantly lower incidence of the composite of all-cause death and MI (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50 to 0.84; p = 0.001), although there was still no significant difference in TVR between the two groups (HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.84 to 1.42; p = 0.53). IVUS guidance has benefits in improving the long-term prognosis for unprotected LMCA stenting.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Stent thrombosis and restenosis: what have we learned and where are we going? The Andreas Grüntzig Lecture ESC 2014

          Modern-day stenting procedures leverage advances in pharmacotherapy and device innovation. Patients treated with contemporary antiplatelet agents, peri-procedural antithrombin therapy and new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) have excellent outcomes over the short to medium term. Indeed, coupled with the reducing costs of these devices in most countries there remain very few indications where patients should be denied treatment with standard-of-care DES therapy. The two major causes of stent failure are stent thrombosis (ST) and in-stent restenosis (ISR). The incidence of both has reduced considerably in recent years. Current clinical registries and randomized trials with broad inclusion criteria show rates of ST at or <1% after 1 year and ∼0.2–0.4% per year thereafter; rates of clinical ISR are 5% respectively. Angiographic surveillance studies in large cohorts show rates of angiographic ISR of ∼10% with new-generation DES. The advent of high-resolution intracoronary imaging has shown that in many cases of late stent failure neoatherosclerotic change within the stented segment represents a final common pathway for both thrombotic and restenotic events. In future, a better understanding of the pathogenesis of this process may translate into improved late outcomes. Moreover, the predominance of non-stent-related disease as a cause of subsequent myocardial infarction during follow-up highlights the importance of lifestyle and pharmacological interventions targeted at modification of the underlying disease process. Finally, although recent developments focus on strategies which circumvent the need for chronically indwelling stents—such as drug-coated balloons or fully bioresorbable stents—more data are needed before the wider use of these therapies can be advocated.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Randomized trial of stents versus bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease.

            Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is increasingly used to treat unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis, although coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been considered to be the treatment of choice. We randomly assigned patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis to undergo CABG (300 patients) or PCI with sirolimus-eluting stents (300 patients). Using a wide margin for noninferiority, we compared the groups with respect to the primary composite end point of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization) at 1 year. Event rates at 2 years were also compared between the two groups. The primary end point occurred in 26 patients assigned to PCI as compared with 20 patients assigned to CABG (cumulative event rate, 8.7% vs. 6.7%; absolute risk difference, 2.0 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.6 to 5.6; P=0.01 for noninferiority). By 2 years, the primary end point had occurred in 36 patients in the PCI group as compared with 24 in the CABG group (cumulative event rate, 12.2% vs. 8.1%; hazard ratio with PCI, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.90 to 2.52; P=0.12). The composite rate of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 2 years occurred in 13 and 14 patients in the two groups, respectively (cumulative event rate, 4.4% and 4.7%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.96; P=0.83). Ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization occurred in 26 patients in the PCI group as compared with 12 patients in the CABG group (cumulative event rate, 9.0% vs. 4.2%; hazard ratio, 2.18; 95% CI, 1.10 to 4.32; P=0.02). In this randomized trial involving patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis, PCI with sirolimus-eluting stents was shown to be noninferior to CABG with respect to major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events. However, the noninferiority margin was wide, and the results cannot be considered clinically directive. (Funded by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation, Seoul, Korea, and others; PRECOMBAT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00422968.).
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Five-year outcomes in patients with left main disease treated with either percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting in the synergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with taxus and cardiac surgery trial.

              Current guidelines recommend coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) when treating significant de novo left main coronary artery (LM) stenosis; however, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has a class IIa indication for unprotected LM disease in selected patients. This analysis compares 5-year clinical outcomes in PCI- and CABG-treated LM patients in the Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial, the largest trial in this group to date.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Sci Rep
                Scientific reports
                Springer Nature
                2045-2322
                2045-2322
                May 24 2017
                : 7
                : 1
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Cardiology, Fu Wai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
                [2 ] Catheterization Laboratories, Fu Wai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
                [3 ] Department of Biostatistics, Fu Wai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
                [4 ] The Cardiovascular Research Foundation, New York, NY, USA.
                [5 ] Catheterization Laboratories, Fu Wai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. bxu@citmd.com.
                [6 ] Department of Cardiology, Fu Wai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China. tangyida@fuwaihospital.org.
                Article
                10.1038/s41598-017-02649-5
                10.1038/s41598-017-02649-5
                5443793
                28539596
                456cb9b0-214e-45ec-8128-669cfff2e780
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content357

                Cited by4

                Most referenced authors309