CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

左主干支架

Abstract

Recommended Article

Left-main restenosis in the DES era-a call for action Current Interventions for the Left Main Bifurcation One or two stents for the distal Left Main bifurcation The DK crush V study - The DK crush V study Double Kissing Crush Versus Provisional Stenting for Left Main Distal Bifurcation Lesions: DKCRUSH-V Randomized Trial Comparison of double kissing crush versus Culotte stenting for unprotected distal left main bifurcation lesions: results from a multicenter, randomized, prospective DKCRUSH-III study Design and rationale for the treatment effects of provisional side branch stenting and DK crush stenting techniques in patients with unprotected distal left main coronary artery bifurcation lesions (DKCRUSH V) Trial Left Main Revascularization in 2017 Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention? Stent fracture is associated with a higher mortality in patients with type-2 diabetes treated by implantation of a second-generation drug-eluting stent

Original Research2018 Dec 10. [Epub ahead of print]

JOURNAL:Coron Artery Dis. Article Link

Outcomes of patients with and without baseline lipid-lowering therapy undergoing revascularization for left main coronary artery disease: analysis from the EXCEL trial

Chen S, Redfors B, Stone GW et al. Keywords: lipid-lowering therapy; CABG; PCI; left main CAD; EXCEL trail; oucome

ABSTRACT


OBJECTIVES - There is a paucity of data on the effect of baseline lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) in patients undergoing revascularization for left main (LM) coronary artery disease (CAD). We compared outcomes for patients with LMCAD randomized to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) according to the presence of baseline LLT in the EXCEL trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS - The EXCEL trial randomized 1905 patients with LMCAD and SYNTAX scores up to 32 to PCI with everolimus-eluting stents versus CABG. Patients were categorized according to whether they were medically treated with LLT at baseline, and their outcomes were examined using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction at 3 years.

RESULTS - Among 1901 patients with known baseline LLT status, 1331 (70.0%) were medically treated with LLT at baseline. There were no significant differences between the PCI and CABG groups in the 3-year rates of the primary endpoint in patients with versus without baseline LLT (Pinteraction=0.62). Among patients with baseline LLT, the 3-year rate of ischemia-driven revascularization was higher after PCI compared with CABG (13.7 vs. 5.3%; adjusted hazard ratio=2.97; 95% confidence interval: 1.95-4.55; P<0.0001), in contrast to patients without baseline LLT (9.8 vs. 12.1%; adjusted hazard ratio=0.79; 95% confidence interval: 0.47-1.33; P=0.39) (Pinteraction=0.0003).

CONCLUSION - In the EXCEL trial, 3-year major adverse event rates after PCI versus CABG for LMCAD were similar and consistent in patients with and without LLT at baseline; however, revascularization during follow-up was more common after PCI compared with CABG in patients with baseline LLT, but not in those without baseline LLT.