CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Stenting Left Main

Abstract

Recommended Article

Five-Year Outcomes after PCI or CABG for Left Main Coronary Disease Randomized study of the crush technique versus provisional side-branch stenting in true coronary bifurcations: the CACTUS (Coronary Bifurcations: Application of the Crushing Technique Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stents) Study Percutaneous coronary intervention for the left main stem and other bifurcation lesions: 12th consensus document from the European Bifurcation Club Intravascular ultrasound in the evaluation and treatment of left main coronary artery disease: a consensus statement from the European Bifurcation Club Percutaneous coronary intervention in left main coronary artery disease: the 13th consensus document from the European Bifurcation Club Differences between the left main and other bifurcations Left Main Stenting: What We Have Learnt So Far? Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Left Main Disease: Pre- and Post-EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Everolimus Eluting Stent Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) and NOBLE (Nordic-Baltic-British Left Main Revascularization Study) Era
|<< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ...>>|

Clinical TrialVolume 11, Issue 13, July 2018

JOURNAL：JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Article Link

Outcomes After Coronary Stenting or Bypass Surgery for Men and Women With Unprotected Left Main Disease: The EXCEL Trial

PW Serruys, R Cavalcante, GW Stone et al. Keywords: coronary artery bypass graft; female; male; PCI; sex; SYNTAX score

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES - The aim of the present study was to assess outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) according to sex in a large randomized trial of patients with unprotected left main disease.


BACKGOURND - In the SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) trial, sex had a significant interaction effect with revascularization strategy, and women had an overall higher mortality when treated with PCI than CABG.

METHODS - The EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trial was a multinational randomized trial that compared PCI with everolimus-eluting stents and CABG in patients with unprotected left main disease. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 3 years.

RESULTS - Of 1,905 patients randomized, 1,464 (76.9%) were men and 441 (23.1%) were women. Compared with men, women were older; had higher prevalence rates of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes; and were less commonly smokers but had lower coronary anatomic burden and complexity (mean SYNTAX score 24.2 vs. 27.2, p < 0.001). By multivariate analysis, sex was not independently associated with either the primary endpoint (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.10; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82 to 1.48; p = 0.53) or all-cause death (HR: 1.39; 95% CI: 0.92 to 2.10; p = 0.12) at 3 years. At 30 days, all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke had occurred in 8.9% of woman treated with PCI, 6.2% of women treated with CABG, 3.6% of men treated with PCI, and 8.4% of men treated with CABG (p for interaction = 0.003). The 3-year rate of the composite primary endpoint was 19.7% in women treated with PCI, 14.6% in women treated with CABG, 13.8% in men treated with PCI, and 14.7% in men treated with CABG (p for interaction = 0.06). These differences were driven by higher periprocedural rates of myocardial infarction in women after PCI and in men after CABG.

CONCLUSIONS - In patients with unprotected left main disease in the EXCEL trial, sex was not an independent predictor of adverse outcomes after revascularization. However, women undergoing PCI had a trend toward worse outcomes, a finding related to associated comorbidities and increased periprocedural complications. Further studies are required to determine the optimal revascularization modality in women with complex coronary artery disease.
>CBS CBS 2019

> CBS 2019 REGISTRATION

> CBS 2019 PROGRAM

> CBS 2019 CALL FOR SCIENCE

> CBS 2019 SPOTLIGHTS

 CBSMD

> CBSMD WEBSITE REGISTRATION

> EDUCATION CENTER

> RECOMMANDED PAPER

> TOP 10 RESEARCH PAPER

> PRE-READING

CBS 2019 CBS 2019 FACULTY Education Resource CBSMD Scientific Library
Copyright ⓒ CBS MD Nanjing China. All rights reserved. 京ICP备16025898号-11
联系我们| Top