CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Stenting Left Main

Abstract

Recommended Article

Intravascular ultrasound in the evaluation and treatment of left main coronary artery disease: a consensus statement from the European Bifurcation Club Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Left Main and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Do We Have the Evidence? Stroke Rates Following Surgical Versus Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization Everolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis. The PRECOMBAT-2 (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) study Drug-eluting stents in elderly patients with coronary artery disease (SENIOR): a randomised single-blind trial Two-year outcomes following unprotected left main stenting with first vs new-generation drug-eluting stents: the FINE registry. EuroIntervention. Incidence and Management of Restenosis After Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Disease With Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents (from Failure in Left Main Study With 2nd Generation Stents-Cardiogroup III Study) Management of left main disease: an update

Original Research2019 Feb 1;4(2):100-109.

JOURNAL:JAMA Cardiol. Article Link

Contemporary Use and Trends in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States: An Analysis of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Research to Practice Initiative

Valle JA, Tamez H, Abbott JD et al. Keywords: unprotected left main coronary artery percutaneous coronary intervention; big data;

ABSTRACT


IMPORTANCE -  Recent data support percutaneous revascularization as an alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting in unprotected left main (ULM) coronary lesions. However, the relevance of these trials to current practice is unclear, as patterns and outcomes of ULM percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in contemporary US clinical practice are not well studied.


OBJECTIVE -  To define the current practice of ULM PCI and its outcomes and compare these with findings reported in clinical trials.


DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS -  This cross-sectional multicenter analysis included data collected from 1662 institutions participating in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) CathPCI Registry between April 2009 and July 2016. Data were collected from 33 128 patients undergoing ULM PCI and 3 309 034 patients undergoing all other PCI. Data were analyzed from June 2017 to May 2018.


MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES -  Patient and procedural characteristics and their temporal trends were compared between ULM PCI and all other PCI. In-hospital major adverse clinical events (ie, death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and emergent coronary artery bypass grafting) were compared using hierarchical logistic regression. Characteristics and outcomes were also compared against clinical trial cohorts.


RESULTS -  Of the 3 342 162 included patients, 2 223 570 (66.5%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 64.2 (12.1) years. Unprotected left main PCI represented 1.0% (33 128 of 3 342 162) of all procedures, modestly increasing from 0.7% to 1.3% over time. The mean (SD) annualized ULM PCI volume was 0.5 (1.5) procedures for operators and 3.2 (6.1) procedures for facilities, with only 1808 of 10 971 operators (16.5%) and 892 of 1662 facilities (53.7%) performing an average of 1 or more ULM PCI annually. After adjustment, major adverse clinical events occurred more frequently with ULM PCI compared with all other PCI (odds ratio, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.39-1.53). Compared with clinical trial populations, patients in the CathPCI Registry were older with more comorbid conditions, and adverse events were more frequent.


CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE -  Use of ULM PCI has increased over time, but overall use remains low. These findings suggest that ULM PCI occurs infrequently in the United States and in an older and more comorbid population than that seen in clinical trials.