Clinical Safety and Performance of GATT-Patch for Hemostasis in Minimal to Moderate Bleeding During Open Liver Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Intraoperative blood loss and postoperative hemorrhage affect outcomes after liver resection. GATT-Patch is a new flexible, pliable hemostatic sealant patch comprising fibrous gelatin carrier impregnated with N-hydroxy-succinimide polyoxazoline. We evaluated safety and performance of the GATT-Patch for hemostasis at the liver resection plane. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing elective open liver surgery were recruited in three centers. GATT-Patch was used for minimal to moderate bleeding at the liver resection plane. The primary endpoint was hemostasis of the first-treated bleeding site at 3 min versus a prespecified performance goal of 65.4%. RESULTS: Two trial stages were performed: I (n = 8) for initial safety and II (n = 39) as the primary outcome cohort. GATT-Patch was applied in 47 patients on 63 bleeding sites. Median age was 60.0 (range 25-80) years and 70% were male. Most (66%) surgeries were for colorectal cancer metastases. The primary endpoint was met in 38 out of 39 patients (97.4%; 95% confidence interval: 84.6%-99.9%) versus 65.4% (P < 0.001). Of all the 63 bleeding sites, hemostasis was 82.7% at 30, 93.7% at 60, and 96.8% at 180 s. No reoperations for rebleeding or device-related issues occurred. CONCLUSIONS: When compared to a performance goal derived from state-of-the-art hemostatic agents, GATT-Patch for the treatment of minimal to moderate bleeding during liver surgery successfully and quickly achieved hemostasis with acceptable safety outcomes. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04819945).

NHS-POx-loaded patch versus fibrin sealant patch in a porcine robotic liver bleeding model.

BACKGROUND: The management of bleeding is paramount to any surgical procedure. With the increased use of less invasive laparoscopic and robotic methods, achieving hemostasis can be challenging since the surgeons cannot manually apply hemostatic agents directly onto bleeding tissue. In this study, we assessed the use of a pliable hemostatic sealant patch comprising fibrous gelatin carrier impregnated with poly(2-oxazoline) (NHS-POx) for hemostasis in robotic liver resection in a porcine bleeding model. METHODS: The NHS-POx-loaded patch (GATT-Patch), was first evaluated in a Feasibility Study to treat surgical bleeding in 10 lesions, followed by a Comparative Study in which the NHS-POx patch was compared to a standard-of-care fibrin sealant patch (TachoSil), in 36 lesions (superficial, resection, or deep injuries mimicking metastasectomies). For each lesion type, the NHS-POx and fibrin sealant patches were used in an alternating fashion with 18 lesions treated with NHS-POx and 18 with the fibrin patch. Animal preparation and surgical procedures were consistent across studies. The primary outcome was time to hemostasis (TTH) within 3 min for the Feasibility Study and within 5 min for the Comparative Study. RESULTS: In the Feasibility Study, 8 of the 10 NHS-POx-treated lesions achieved hemostasis at 30 s and 3 min. In the Comparative Study, all 18 NHS-POx patch-treated lesions and 9 of the 18 fibrin sealant patch-treated lesions achieved hemostasis at 5 min. Median TTH with NHS-POx vs fibrin sealant patch was 30 vs 300 s (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this animal study, hemostasis during robotic liver surgery was achieved faster and more often with the NHS-POx loaded vs fibrin sealant patch.

Ten-Year All-Cause Death According to Completeness of Revascularization in Patients With Three-Vessel Disease or Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Insights From the SYNTAX Extended Survival Study.

BACKGROUND: Ten-year all-cause death according to incomplete (IR) versus complete revascularization (CR) has not been fully investigated in patients with 3-vessel disease and left main coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS: The SYNTAX Extended Survival study (Synergy Between PCI With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery: SYNTAX Extended Survival [SYNTAXES]) evaluated vital status up to 10 years in patients who were originally enrolled in the SYNTAX trial. In the present substudy, outcomes of the CABG CR group were compared with the CABG IR, PCI CR, and PCI IR groups. In addition, in the PCI cohort, the residual SYNTAX score (rSS) was used to quantify the extent of IR and to assess its association with fatal late outcome. The rSS of 0 suggests CR, whereas a rSS>0 identifies the degree of IR. RESULTS: IR was more frequently observed in patients with PCI versus CABG (56.6% versus 36.8%) and more common in those with 3-vessel disease than left main coronary artery disease in both the PCI arm (58.5% versus 53.8%) and the CABG arm (42.8% versus 27.5%). Patients undergoing PCI with CR had no significant difference in 10-year all-cause death compared with those undergoing CABG (22.2% for PCI with CR versus 24.3% for CABG with IR versus 23.8% for CABG with CR). In contrast, those with PCI and IR had a significantly higher risk of all-cause death at 10 years compared with CABG and CR (33.5% versus 23.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.48 [95% CI, 1.15-1.91]). When patients with PCI were stratified according to the rSS, those with a rSS≤8 had no significant difference in all-cause death at 10 years as the other terciles (22.2% for rSS=0 versus 23.9% for rSS>0-4 versus 28.9% for rSS>4-8), whereas a rSS>8 had a significantly higher risk of 10-year all-cause death than those undergoing PCI with CR (50.1% versus 22.2%; adjusted hazard ratio, 3.40 [95% CI, 2.13-5.43]). CONCLUSIONS: IR is common after PCI, and the degree of incompleteness was associated with 10-year mortality. If it is unlikely that complete (or nearly complete; rSS<8) revascularization can be achieved with PCI in patients with 3-vessel disease, CABG should be considered. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00114972. URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03417050.

Ten-year all-cause death after percutaneous or surgical revascularization in diabetic patients with complex coronary artery disease.

AIMS: The aim of this article was to compare rates of all-cause death at 10 years following coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with or without diabetes. METHODS AND RESULTS: The SYNTAXES study evaluated up to 10-year survival of 1800 patients with three-vessel disease (3VD) and/or left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) randomized to receive either PCI or CABG in the SYNTAX trial. Ten-year all-cause death according to diabetic status and revascularization strategy was examined. In diabetics (n = 452), the risk of mortality was numerically higher with PCI compared with CABG at 5 years [19.6% vs. 13.3%, hazard ratio (HR): 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.96, 2.43, P = 0.075], with the opposite seen between 5 and 10 years (PCI vs. CABG: 20.8% vs. 24.4%, HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.52, 1.27, P = 0.366). Irrespective of diabetic status, there was no significant difference in all-cause death at 10 years between patients receiving PCI or CABG, the absolute treatment difference was 1.9% in diabetics (PCI vs. CABG: 36.4% vs. 34.5%, difference: 1.9%, 95% CI: -7.6%, 11.1%, P = 0.551). Among insulin-treated patients (n = 182), all-cause death at 10 years was numerically higher with PCI (47.9% vs. 39.6%, difference: 8.2%, 95% CI: -6.5%, 22.5%, P = 0.227). CONCLUSIONS: The treatment effects of PCI vs. CABG on all-cause death at 10 years in patients with 3VD and/or LMCAD were similar irrespective of the presence of diabetes. There may, however, be a survival benefit with CABG in patients with insulin-treated diabetes. The association between revascularization strategy and very long-term ischaemic and safety outcomes for patients with diabetes needs further investigation in dedicated trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: SYNTAX: ClinicalTrials.gov reference: NCT00114972 and SYNTAX Extended Survival: ClinicalTrials.gov reference: NCT03417050.

Redevelopment and validation of the SYNTAX score II to individualise decision making between percutaneous and surgical revascularisation in patients with complex coronary artery disease: secondary analysis of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAXES trial with external cohort validation.

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials are considered the gold standard for testing the efficacy of novel therapeutic interventions, and typically report the average treatment effect as a summary result. As the result of treatment can vary between patients, basing treatment decisions for individual patients on the overall average treatment effect could be suboptimal. We aimed to develop an individualised decision making tool to select an optimal revascularisation strategy in patients with complex coronary artery disease. METHODS: The SYNTAX Extended Survival (SYNTAXES) study is an investigator-driven extension follow-up of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial done in 85 hospitals across 18 North American and European countries between March, 2005, and April, 2007. Patients with de-novo three-vessel and left main coronary artery disease were randomly assigned (1:1) to either the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) group or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) group. The SYNTAXES study ascertained 10-year all-cause deaths. We used Cox regression to develop a clinical prognostic index for predicting death over a 10-year period, which was combined, in a second stage, with assigned treatment (PCI or CABG) and two prespecified effect-modifiers, which were selected on the basis of previous evidence: disease type (three-vessel disease or left main coronary artery disease) and anatomical SYNTAX score. We used similar techniques to develop a model to predict the 5-year risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (defined as a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal stroke, or non-fatal myocardial infarction) in patients receiving PCI or CABG. We then assessed the ability of these models to predict the risk of death or a major adverse cardiovascular event, and their differences (ie, the estimated benefit of CABG versus PCI by calculating the absolute risk difference between the two strategies) by cross-validation with the SYNTAX trial (n=1800 participants) and external validation in the pooled population (n=3380 participants) of the FREEDOM, BEST, and PRECOMBAT trials. The concordance (C)-index was used to measure discriminative ability, and calibration plots were used to assess the degree of agreement between predictions and observations. FINDINGS: At cross-validation, the newly developed SYNTAX score II, termed SYNTAX score II 2020, showed a helpful discriminative ability in both treatment groups for predicting 10-year all-cause deaths (C-index=0·73 [95% CI 0·69-0·76] for PCI and 0·73 [0·69-0·76] for CABG) and 5-year major adverse cardiovascular events (C-index=0·65 [0·61-0·69] for PCI and C-index=0·71 [0·67-0·75] for CABG). At external validation, the SYNTAX score II 2020 showed helpful discrimination (C-index=0·67 [0·63-0·70] for PCI and C-index=0·62 [0·58-0·66] for CABG) and good calibration for predicting 5-year major adverse cardiovascular events. The estimated treatment benefit of CABG over PCI varied substantially among patients in the trial population, and the benefit predictions were well calibrated. INTERPRETATION: The SYNTAX score II 2020 for predicting 10-year deaths and 5-year major adverse cardiovascular events can help to identify individuals who will benefit from either CABG or PCI, thereby supporting heart teams, patients, and their families to select optimal revascularisation strategies. FUNDING: The German Heart Research Foundation and the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute.

Impact of stent length and diameter on 10-year mortality in the SYNTAXES trial.

OBJECTIVES: We investigated the impact of total stent length (TSL) and average nominal stent diameter (ASD) on 10-year mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the SYNTAXES trial. BACKGROUND: TSL and ASD in patients treated with PCI are associated with major adverse cardiovascular events. However, the treatment effect of PCI with extensive and/or small stenting as compared with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for complex coronary artery disease has not been fully evaluated. METHODS: Impacts on mortality of extensive stenting defined as TSL >100 mm and small stenting as ASD <3 mm were analyzed in 893 PCI patients and were compared to 865 CABG patients. RESULTS: TSL as a continuous variable was significantly associated with 10-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.05 [1.01-1.09] per 10 mm increase). PCI patients with extensive stenting had a higher 10 year mortality than CABG patients (adjusted HR, 1.97 [1.41-2.74]) or not- extensive stenting PCI (adjusted HR, 1.94 [1.36-2.77]). Although ASD did not have a significant association with 10 year mortality (adjusted HR, 0.97 [0.85-1.11] per 0.25 mm increase), PCI with small stents was associated with a higher 10 year mortality, compared to CABG (adjusted HR, 1.66 [1.23-2.26]) and PCI performed with large stents (adjusted HR, 1.74 [1.19-2.53]). Patients treated with not-extensive and large stents had similar mortality rates (24.0 versus 23.8%) as those treated with CABG. CONCLUSIONS: Extensive and small stenting were associated with higher 10 year mortality, compared with CABG. When patients have to be treated with extensive or small stenting, revascularization with CABG should be preferred.

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial.

BACKGROUND: The Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial was a non-inferiority trial that compared percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using first-generation paclitaxel-eluting stents with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with de-novo three-vessel and left main coronary artery disease, and reported results up to 5 years. We now report 10-year all-cause death results. METHODS: The SYNTAX Extended Survival (SYNTAXES) study is an investigator-driven extension of follow-up of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial done in 85 hospitals across 18 North American and European countries. Patients with de-novo three-vessel and left main coronary artery disease were randomly assigned (1:1) to the PCI group or CABG group. Patients with a history of PCI or CABG, acute myocardial infarction, or an indication for concomitant cardiac surgery were excluded. The primary endpoint of the SYNTAXES study was 10-year all-cause death, which was assessed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Prespecified subgroup analyses were performed according to the presence or absence of left main coronary artery disease and diabetes, and according to coronary complexity defined by core laboratory SYNTAX score tertiles. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03417050. FINDINGS: From March, 2005, to April, 2007, 1800 patients were randomly assigned to the PCI (n=903) or CABG (n=897) group. Vital status information at 10 years was complete for 841 (93%) patients in the PCI group and 848 (95%) patients in the CABG group. At 10 years, 248 (28%) patients had died after PCI and 212 (24%) after CABG (hazard ratio 1·19 [95% CI 0·99-1·43], p=0·066). Among patients with three-vessel disease, 153 (28%) of 546 had died after PCI versus 114 (21%) of 549 after CABG (hazard ratio 1·42 [95% CI 1·11-1·81]), and among patients with left main coronary artery disease, 95 (27%) of 357 had died after PCI versus 98 (28%) of 348 after CABG (0·92 [0·69-1·22], pinteraction=0·023). There was no treatment-by-subgroup interaction with diabetes (pinteraction=0·60) and no linear trend across SYNTAX score tertiles (ptrend=0·20). INTERPRETATION: At 10 years, no significant difference existed in all-cause death between PCI using first-generation paclitaxel-eluting stents and CABG. However, CABG provided a significant survival benefit in patients with three-vessel disease, but not in patients with left main coronary artery disease. FUNDING: German Foundation of Heart Research (SYNTAXES study, 5-10-year follow-up) and Boston Scientific Corporation (SYNTAX study, 0-5-year follow-up).

Mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting for coronary artery disease: a pooled analysis of individual patient data.

BACKGROUND: Numerous randomised trials have compared coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with coronary artery disease. However, no studies have been powered to detect a difference in mortality between the revascularisation strategies. METHODS: We did a systematic review up to July 19, 2017, to identify randomised clinical trials comparing CABG with PCI using stents. Eligible studies included patients with multivessel or left main coronary artery disease who did not present with acute myocardial infarction, did PCI with stents (bare-metal or drug-eluting), and had more than 1 year of follow-up for all-cause mortality. In a collaborative, pooled analysis of individual patient data from the identified trials, we estimated all-cause mortality up to 5 years using Kaplan-Meier analyses and compared PCI with CABG using a random-effects Cox proportional-hazards model stratified by trial. Consistency of treatment effect was explored in subgroup analyses, with subgroups defined according to baseline clinical and anatomical characteristics. FINDINGS: We included 11 randomised trials involving 11 518 patients selected by heart teams who were assigned to PCI (n=5753) or to CABG (n=5765). 976 patients died over a mean follow-up of 3·8 years (SD 1·4). Mean Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score was 26·0 (SD 9·5), with 1798 (22·1%) of 8138 patients having a SYNTAX score of 33 or higher. 5 year all-cause mortality was 11·2% after PCI and 9·2% after CABG (hazard ratio [HR] 1·20, 95% CI 1·06-1·37; p=0·0038). 5 year all-cause mortality was significantly different between the interventions in patients with multivessel disease (11·5% after PCI vs 8·9% after CABG; HR 1·28, 95% CI 1·09-1·49; p=0·0019), including in those with diabetes (15·5% vs 10·0%; 1·48, 1·19-1·84; p=0·0004), but not in those without diabetes (8·7% vs 8·0%; 1·08, 0·86-1·36; p=0·49). SYNTAX score had a significant effect on the difference between the interventions in multivessel disease. 5 year all-cause mortality was similar between the interventions in patients with left main disease (10·7% after PCI vs 10·5% after CABG; 1·07, 0·87-1·33; p=0·52), regardless of diabetes status and SYNTAX score. INTERPRETATION: CABG had a mortality benefit over PCI in patients with multivessel disease, particularly those with diabetes and higher coronary complexity. No benefit for CABG over PCI was seen in patients with left main disease. Longer follow-up is needed to better define mortality differences between the revascularisation strategies. FUNDING: None.

Current Practice of State-of-the-Art Surgical Coronary Revascularization.

Coronary artery bypass grafting remains one of the most commonly performed major surgeries, with well-established symptomatic and prognostic benefits in patients with multivessel and left main coronary artery disease. This review summarizes current indications, contemporary practice, and outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting. Despite an increasingly higher-risk profile of patients, outcomes have significantly improved over time, with significant reductions in operative mortality and perioperative complications. Five- and 10-year survival rates are ≈85% to 95% and 75%, respectively. A number of technical advances could further improve short- and long-term outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting. Developments in off-pump and no-touch procedures; epiaortic scanning; conduit selection, including bilateral internal mammary artery and radial artery use; intraoperative graft assessment; minimally invasive procedures, including robotic-assisted surgery; and hybrid coronary revascularization are discussed.

Mechanical versus bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement.

Mechanical valves used for aortic valve replacement (AVR) continue to be associated with bleeding risks because of anticoagulation therapy, while bioprosthetic valves are at risk of structural valve deterioration requiring reoperation. This risk/benefit ratio of mechanical and bioprosthetic valves has led American and European guidelines on valvular heart disease to be consistent in recommending the use of mechanical prostheses in patients younger than 60 years of age. Despite these recommendations, the use of bioprosthetic valves has significantly increased over the last decades in all age groups. A systematic review of manuscripts applying propensity-matching or multivariable analysis to compare the usage of mechanical vs. bioprosthetic valves found either similar outcomes between the two types of valves or favourable outcomes with mechanical prostheses, particularly in younger patients. The risk/benefit ratio and choice of valves will be impacted by developments in valve designs, anticoagulation therapy, reducing the required international normalized ratio, and transcatheter and minimally invasive procedures. However, there is currently no evidence to support lowering the age threshold for implanting a bioprosthesis. Physicians in the Heart Team and patients should be cautious in pursuing more bioprosthetic valve use until its benefit is clearly proven in middle-aged patients.

Considerations and Recommendations for the Introduction of Objective Performance Criteria for Transcatheter Aortic Heart Valve Device Approval.

In the United States, new surgical heart valves can be approved on the basis of objective performance criteria (OPC). In contrast, the US Food and Drug Administration traditionally requires stricter criteria for transcatheter heart valve (THV) approval, including randomized, clinical trials. Recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of new-generation THVs based on single-arm studies has generated interest in alternative study approaches for THV device approval. This review evaluates whether THV device approval could follow a pathway analogous to that of surgical heart valves by incorporating OPC and provides several considerations and recommendations. Factors to be taken into account in the construction of OPC include the maturity of THV technology, variability in transcatheter aortic valve replacement practice, end points included as OPC, follow-up terms for specific OPC, patient populations to which these OPC apply, and (statistical) methods for OPC development. We recommend that approval of THV devices in the United States for low- and intermediate-risk patients or for new indications should provisionally rely on data from randomized, clinical trials. However, it is recommended that formal OPC be applied for approval of new-generation THVs for use in high- and extreme-risk patient populations.

Clinical trial design principles and endpoint definitions for transcatheter mitral valve repair and replacement: part 2: endpoint definitions: A consensus document from the Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium.

Mitral regurgitation (MR) is one of the most prevalent valve disorders and has numerous aetiologies, including primary (organic) MR, due to underlying degenerative/structural mitral valve (MV) pathology, and secondary (functional) MR, which is principally caused by global or regional left ventricular remodelling and/or severe left atrial dilation. Diagnosis and optimal management of MR requires integration of valve disease and heart failure specialists, MV cardiac surgeons, interventional cardiologists with expertise in structural heart disease, and imaging experts. The introduction of trans- catheter MV therapies has highlighted the need for a consensus approach to pragmatic clinical trial design and uniform endpoint definitions to evaluate outcomes in patients with MR. The Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium is a collaboration between leading academic research organizations and physician-scientists specializing in MV disease from the United States and Europe. Three in-person meetings were held in Virginia and New York during which 44 heart failure, valve, and imaging experts, MV surgeons and interventional cardiologists, clinical trial specialists and statisticians, and representatives from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration considered all aspects of MV pathophysiology, prognosis, and therapies, culminating in a 2-part document describing consensus recommendations for clinical trial design (Part 1) and endpoint definitions (Part 2) to guide evaluation of transcatheter and surgical therapies for MR. The adoption of these recommendations will afford robustness and consistency in the comparative effectiveness evaluation of new devices and approaches to treat MR. These principles may be useful for regulatory assessment of new transcatheter MV devices, as well as for monitoring local and regional outcomes to guide quality improvement initiatives.

Revascularization Options: Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CAGB) is superior to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in reducing mortality in certain patients and improving the composite end points of angina, recurrent myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization procedures. However, CABG is associated with a higher perioperative stroke risk. For patients with less complex disease or left main coronary disease, PCI is an acceptable alternative to CABG. Lesion complexity is an essential consideration for stenting, whereas patient comorbidity is an essential consideration for CABG. All patients with complex multivessel coronary artery disease should be reviewed by a heart team including a cardiac surgeon and interventional cardiologist.

A systematic review and critical assessment of 11 discordant meta-analyses on reduced-function CYP2C19 genotype and risk of adverse clinical outcomes in clopidogrel users.

We systematically investigated how 11 overlapping meta-analyses on the association between CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles and clinical efficacy of clopidogrel could yield contradictory outcomes. The results of the meta-analyses differed because more recent meta-analyses included more primary studies and some had not included conference abstracts. Conclusions differed because between-study heterogeneity and publication bias were handled differently across meta-analyses. All meta-analyses on the clinical end point observed significant heterogeneity and several reported evidence for publication bias, but only one out of eight statistically significant meta-analyses concluded that therefore the association was unproven and one other refrained from quantifying a pooled estimate because of heterogeneity. For the end point stent thrombosis, all meta-analyses reported statistically significant associations with CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles with no statistically significant evidence for heterogeneity, but only three had investigated publication bias and also found evidence for it. One study therefore concluded that there was no evidence for an association, and one other doubted the association because of a high level of heterogeneity. In summary, meta-analyses on the association between CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles and clinical efficacy of clopidogrel differed widely with regard to assessment and interpretation of heterogeneity and publication bias. The substantial heterogeneity and publication bias implies that personalized antiplatelet management based on genotyping is not supported by the currently available evidence.Genet Med advance online publication 19 June 2014.

What the cardiothoracic surgeon wants to know from the radiologist: from X-ray reporting to imaging consultancy and Heart Team membership.

In the early days of cardiac surgery, the pretreatment multidisciplinary discussion involved a presentation of the case history and diagnostic imaging by the clinical cardiologist. At this time, most, if not all, cardiac imaging techniques were in the hands of the cardiologist. If the radiologist made a report, this was done relatively late in the clinical process and only concerned the perioperative radiographs. In recent years, multidisciplinary decision-making in the context of a Heart Team has gained an increasingly important role in the process of decision-making with regard to the available therapy options in individual patients. Nevertheless, the concept of the Heart Team is still evolving. The minimal requirements for the Heart Team include the presence of the attending cardiologist, an interventional cardiologist and a cardiac surgeon. Those members of the Heart Team should be aware of the local possibilities, should correctly make conclusions about the available data and should put this information into the clinical context and preference of the patient. In addition, in areas where expertise in cardiac imaging such as CT and MRI is relevant, this would explicitly require expertise of the Heart Team in these specific areas, most often by involving a radiologist, to provide the optimal joint treatment strategy recommendation.

Coronary artery bypass grafting vs. percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with three-vessel disease: final five-year follow-up of the SYNTAX trial.

AIMS: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been considered the standard of care for patients with three-vessel disease (3VD), but long-term comparative results from randomized trials of CABG vs. percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using drug-eluting stents (DES) remain limited. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with de novo 3VD or left main disease were randomly assigned to PCI with the paclitaxel-eluting first-generation stent or CABG in the SYNTAX trial. This pre-specified analysis presents the 5-year outcomes of patients with 3VD (n = 1095). The rate of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was significantly higher in patients with PCI compared with CABG (37.5 vs. 24.2%, respectively; P < 0.001). Percutaneous coronary intervention as opposed to CABG resulted in significantly higher rates of the composite of death/stroke/myocardial infarction (MI) (22.0 vs. 14.0%, respectively; P < 0.001), all-cause death (14.6 vs. 9.2%, respectively; P = 0.006), MI (9.2 vs. 4.0%, respectively; P = 0.001), and repeat revascularization (25.4 vs. 12.6%, respectively; P < 0.001); however, stroke was similar between groups at 5 years (3.0 vs. 3.5%, respectively; P = 0.66). Results were dependent on lesion complexity (P for interaction = 0.12); in patients with a low (0-22) SYNTAX score, PCI vs. CABG resulted in similar rates of MACCE (33.3% vs. 26.8%, respectively; P = 0.21) but significantly more repeat revascularization (25.4% vs. 12.6%, respectively; P = 0.038), while in intermediate (23-32) or high (≥ 33) SYNTAX score terciles, CABG demonstrated clear superiority in terms of MACCE, death, MI, and repeat revascularization. Differences in MACCE between PCI and CABG were larger in diabetics [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.30] than non-diabetics (HR = 1.51), although the P for interaction failed to reach significance for MACCE (P for interaction = 0.095) or any of the other endpoints. CONCLUSION: Five-year results of patients with 3VD treated with CABG or PCI using the first-generation paclitaxel-eluting DES suggest that CABG should remain the standard of care as it resulted in significantly lower rates of death, MI, and repeat revascularization, while stroke rates were similar. For patients with low SYNTAX scores, PCI is an acceptable revascularization strategy, although at a price of significantly higher rates of repeat revascularization. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00114972.