[Mechanical circulatory support systems : When and how much protection does a PCI need?] / Mechanische Kreislaufunterstützungssysteme : Wie viel Schutz braucht eine PCI wann?

The interventional treatment of high-risk patients remains challenging and has a high potential for improvement despite all technical innovations. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) systems can be meaningful depending on the clinical situation, although a clear study situation for this is so far lacking. Multivessel coronary disease and a high SYNTAX score combined with impaired ventricular function is a possible predictor combination for the use of MCS that justifies the higher risk of complications.

Prognostic values of the SYNTAX score II and the erythrocyte sedimentation rate on long-term clinical outcomes in STEMI patients with multivessel disease: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of evidence on the combination of the SYNTAX score II (SSII) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) in assessing the long-term prognosis of patients with ST-elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel disease. The objective of this study was to investigate whether the ESR could enhance the predictive value of SSII on the long-term prognosis of STEMI patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study involving 483 STEMI and multivessel disease subjects receiving primary percutaneous coronary intervention was conducted. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) included cardiovascular death, acute heart failure, recurrent myocardial infarction, revascularization, and nonfatal stroke. The predicted values of different models were estimated by a likelihood ratio test, Akaike's information criteria (AIC), receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, net reclassification improvement (NRI), and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI). RESULTS: During the follow-up period of up to 52 months, both the SSII and ESR were independently associated with MACE (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.032, p < 0.001; and HR = 1.021, p < 0.001, respectively). The likelihood test indicated that ESR could improve the prognostic model containing SSII (p < 0.001), while the combined model of SSII and ESR attained a lower AIC (p < 0.001). The area under the ROC curve of the combined model containing SSII and ESR increased by 0.05 (p = 0.04) compared to that of the model with SSII alone. The net reclassification and integrated discrimination of the SSII alone model improved significantly with ESR (NRI = 0.0319, p < 0.001; IDI = 0.0334, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic model containing SSII, which is an independent risk factor of MACE, had a significantly enhanced predictive probability with the addition of ESR.

Left main coronary artery disease: A review of the spectrum of noninvasive diagnostic modalities.

Medically managed significant left main (LM) stem disease has been considered a determinant of increased cardiac mortality approaching 50% at 3-year follow-up. Despite the clinical significance of LM disease, studies comparing the various diagnostic modalities, especially noninvasive, are sparse. Clinicians, particularly imagers, should be aware of the strengths and weaknesses of existing modalities to diagnose LM disease as integrating many clues (history, symptoms, electrocardiogram, and stress hemodynamics are essential to suspect this diagnosis and proceed to the next step). Here we review the existing data on the current role of electrocardiography, nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging (single photon emission computed tomography and positron emission tomography), stress echocardiography, cardiac computed tomography, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in diagnostic evaluation of LM disease. Wherever applicable we have extended our discussion to multivessel coronary artery disease encompassing scenarios where LMS can present as LM equivalent with or without extensive multivessel coronary artery disease.

Meta-analysis of 14 trials comparing bypass grafting vs drug-eluting stents in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Clinical trials have reported lower mortality and repeated revascularization rate in diabetic patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) as compared to percutaneous revascularization. However, these studies were conducted in the era of bare-metal stents. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to compare CABG to PCI with drug-eluting stents (DES) in diabetic patients with multivessel and/or left main disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: The literature was scanned by formal search of electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases), and major international scientific session abstracts from 2000 to 2013. Primary endpoint was mortality. A total of 14 (4 randomized and 10 non-randomized) trials were finally included, with a total of 7072 patients. Up to 5 years follow-up, CABG was associated with a reduction in mortality (7.3% vs 10.4%, OR[95%CI] = 0.65[0.55-0.77], p < 0.0001; phet = 0.00001), with similar results in both RCTs (OR[95%CI] = 0.64[0.50-0.82], p = 0.0005) and NRCTs (OR[95%CI] = 0.75[0.6-0.94)], p = 0.01) (p int = 0.93). A significant relationship was observed between risk profile and benefits in mortality with CABG (p < 0.001). CABG reduced target vessel revascularization (TVR; 5.2% vs 15.7%, OR[95%CI] = 0.30[0.25-0.36], p < 0.00001, p het = 0.02), with a relationship between risk profile and the benefits from CABG as compared to DES (p < 0.0001). CABG was associated with a lower rate of MACCE (14.9% vs 22.9%, OR[95%CI] = 0.59[0.51-0.67], p < 0.00001, p het<0.00001) but higher risk of CVA (3.6% vs 1.4%, OR[95%CI] = 2.34[1.63-3.35], p < 0.00001, p het = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis demonstrates that among diabetic patients with multivessel disease and/or left main disease, CABG provides benefits in mortality and TVR, especially in high-risk patients but it is counterbalanced by a higher risk of stroke. Future trials are certainly needed in the era of new DES and improved antiplatelet therapies.

Outcomes Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Multivessel Disease Who Were Recommended for But Declined Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Patients may prefer percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) over coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, despite heart team recommendations. The outcomes in such patients have not been examined. We sought to examine the results of PCI in patients who were recommended for but declined CABG. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients with stable ischemic heart disease and unprotected left main or 3-vessel disease or Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery score >22 who underwent PCI after heart team review between 2013 and 2020 were included. Patients were categorized into 3 groups according to heart team recommendations on the basis of appropriate use criteria: (1) PCI-recommended; (2) CABG-eligible but refused CABG (CABG-refusal); and (3) CABG-ineligible. The primary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 1 year. The study included 3687 patients undergoing PCI (PCI-recommended, n=1718 [46.6%]), CABG-refusal (n=1595 [43.3%]), and CABG-ineligible (n=374 [10.1%]). Clinical and procedural risk increased across the 3 groups, with the highest comorbidity burden in CABG-ineligible patients. Composite events within 1 year after PCI occurred in 55 (4.1%), 91 (7.0%), and 41 (14.8%) of patients in the PCI-recommended, CABG-refusal, and CABG-ineligible groups, respectively. After multivariable adjustment, the risk of the primary composite outcome was significantly higher in the CABG-refusal (hazard ratio [HR], 1.67 [95% CI, 1.08-3.56]; P=0.02) and CABG-ineligible patients (HR, 3.26 [95% CI, 1.28-3.65]; P=0.004) groups compared with the reference PCI-recommended group, driven by increased death and stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiovascular event rates after PCI were significantly higher in patients with multivessel disease who declined or were ineligible for CABG. Our findings provide real-world data to inform shared decision-making discussions.

Minimally Invasive Isolated and Hybrid Surgical Revascularization for Multivessel Coronary Disease: A Single-Center Long-Term Follow-Up.

INTRODUCTION: Some evidence suggests that surgical minimally invasive (MIDCAB) and hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) are safe and potentially effective at short-term follow-up. Data on long-term outcomes are more limited and inconclusive. METHODS: Between February 2013 and December 2023, a total of 1997 patients underwent surgical coronary artery revascularization at our institution, of whom, 92 (4.7%) received left anterior mini-thoracotomy access (MIDCAB), either isolated (N = 78) or in combination with percutaneous coronary intervention (N = 14, HCR group). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 75 months (range 3.1: 149 months), cardiac mortality was 0% while overall mortality was 3%, with one in-hospital mortality and two additional late deaths. Conversion to sternotomy happened in two patients (2.1%), and surgical re-explorations occurred in five patients (4.6%), of whom three for bleeding and two for graft failure. All patients received left internal mammary (LIMA) to left anterior descending artery (LAD) grafting (100%). In the HCR group, 10 patients (72%) showed percutaneous revascularization (PCI) after MIDCAB, showing PCI on a mean of 1.6 ± 0.6 vessels and implanting 2.1 ± 0.9 drug-eluting stents. CONCLUSIONS: MIDCAB, in isolation or in association with hybrid coronary revascularization, is associated with encouraging short- and long-term results in selected patients discussed within a dedicated heart-team.

Long-term outcomes of complete versus incomplete revascularization after drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with multivessel coronary disease.

BACKGROUND: A limited number of studies on the impact of complete revascularization (CR) vs. incomplete revascularization (IR) on long-term outcomes in patients with multivessel coronary disease (MVD) in current percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) practice have yielded inconsistent results. METHODS: Between April 2004 and November 2010, 7,376 consecutive patients with MVD underwent PCI at the Fuwai Hospital in Beijing, China. Patients who underwent prior CABG and those who had an acute myocardial infarction (MI) within 24 hr before revascularization or presented with cardiogenic shock were excluded. Angiographic CR was defined as successful angioplasty of all diseased lesions in the major epicardial coronary vessels and their first degree side branches (diameter ≥2.5 mm), and proximal CR was defined as successful angioplasty of all diseased proximal arteries. RESULTS: Among 7,065 patients with MVD undergoing PCI treatment, angiographic CR was performed in 1,188 patients (16.8%), and proximal CR in 2,053 patients (29.1%). The study found that either angiographic or proximal IR were associated with significantly higher estimated 3-year rate of cardiac death (2.55% vs. 1.13%, log-rank P = 0.016; and 2.70% vs. 1.43%, log-rank P = 0.024, respectively). After adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics between IR and CR patients, angiographic IR was associated with a significantly higher rate of cardiac death (adjusted hazards ratio [HR]: 2.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-6.41) while proximal IR was associated with a numerically higher rate of cardiac death (adjusted HR: 1.72, 95% CI: 0.93-3.17). For the subgroup of ≥2-vessel IR with total occlusion, either angiographic or proximal IR patients had significantly higher rate of cardiac death (adjusted HR: 4.25, 95% CI: 1.50-12.09; and adjusted HR: 3.02, 95% CI: 1.40-6.52, respectively). CONCLUSION: Compared with IR, patients with CR had better clinical outcomes, supporting CR as first choice for patients with MVD.

Outcomes of Medical Therapy Plus PCI for Multivessel or Left Main CAD Ineligible for Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is increasingly used to revascularize patients ineligible for CABG, but few studies describe these patients and their outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to describe characteristics, utility of risk prediction, and outcomes of patients with left main or multivessel coronary artery disease ineligible for coronary bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS: Patients with complex coronary artery disease ineligible for CABG were enrolled in a prospective registry of medical therapy + PCI. Angiograms were evaluated by an independent core laboratory. Observed-to-expected 30-day mortality ratios were calculated using The Society for Thoracic Surgeons (STS) and EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) II scores, surgeon-estimated 30-day mortality, and the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) CathPCI model. Health status was assessed at baseline, 1 month, and 6 months. RESULTS: A total of 726 patients were enrolled from 22 programs. The mean SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score was 32.4 ± 12.2 before and 15.0 ± 11.7 after PCI. All-cause mortality was 5.6% at 30 days and 12.3% at 6 months. Observed-to-expected mortality ratios were 1.06 (95% CI: 0.71-1.36) with The Society for Thoracic Surgeons score, 0.99 (95% CI: 0.71-1.27) with the EuroSCORE II, 0.59 (95% CI: 0.42-0.77) using cardiac surgeons' estimates, and 4.46 (95% CI: 2.35-7.99) using the NCDR CathPCI score. Health status improved significantly from baseline to 6 months: SAQ summary score (65.9 ± 22.5 vs 86.5 ± 15.1; P < 0.0001), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire summary score (54.1 ± 27.2 vs 82.6 ± 19.7; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients ineligible for CABG who undergo PCI have complex clinical profiles and high disease burden. Following PCI, short-term mortality is considerably lower than surgeons' estimates, similar to surgical risk model predictions but is over 4-fold higher than estimated by the NCDR CathPCI model. Patients' health status improved significantly through 6 months.

Culprit vessel vs. immediate multivessel vs. out-of-hospital staged intervention for patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease.

Background and aims: The optimal interventional strategy remains undetermined in hemodynamically stable patients with NSTEMI and MVD. This study aimed to examine clinical prognosis among culprit vessel, immediate multivessel, and staged percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with NSTEMI and MVD. Methods: This retrospective, observational, single-center study included 943 hemodynamically stable patients with NSTEMI and MVD who had undergone successful drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation from January 2014 to December 2019. Patients were categorized into culprit lesion-only PCI (CL-PCI), immediate multivessel PCI (MV-PCI), and out-of-hospital staged MV-PCI according to PCI strategy. The primary outcome was the composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or unplanned repeat revascularization. The secondary outcomes were all-cause death, cardiac death, MI, and unplanned repeat revascularization. Results: Over a median follow-up of 59 months, immediate MV-PCI was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death than CL-PCI (HR: 0.591, 95%CI: 0.364-0.960, P = 0.034). Out-of-hospital staged MV-PCI was associated with a reduced risk of MACE (HR: 0.448, 95%CI: 0.314-0.638, P < 0.001) and all-cause death (HR: 0.326, 95%CI: 0.183-0.584, P < 0.001) compared with CL-PCI. The above results were accordant after multivariate COX analysis and propensity score matching. MACE (HR: 0.560, 95%CI: 0.385-0.813, P = 0.002) and repeat revascularization (HR: 0.627, 95%CI: 0.400-0.982, P = 0.041) were significantly less likely to occur with out-of-hospital MV-PCI rather than immediate MV-PCI. However, the incidences of primary and secondary outcomes were comparable between immediate and staged PCI after confounder adjustment using multivariate regression and propensity score matching analysis. For subgroup analyses stratified by synergy between PCI with taxus and cardiac surgery score, staged MV-PCI was found to lower the risk of MACE compared with immediate MV-PCI in patients with more complex coronary disease. Conclusion: Hemodynamically stable patients with NSTEMI and MVD benefited from the strategy of MV-PCI. Patients with complex coronary anatomy treated with out-of-hospital staged MV-PCI rather than immediate MV-PCI had lower risks of MACE. These need to be confirmed in the future randomized study.

The Association of Lipoprotein(a) and Circulating Monocyte Subsets with Severe Coronary Atherosclerosis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Chronic inflammation associated with the uncontrolled activation of innate and acquired immunity plays a fundamental role in all stages of atherogenesis. Monocytes are a heterogeneous population and each subset contributes differently to the inflammatory process. A high level of lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) is a proven cardiovascular risk factor. The aim of the study was to investigate the association between the increased concentration of Lp(a) and monocyte subpopulations in patients with a different severity of coronary atherosclerosis. METHODS: 150 patients (124 males) with a median age of 60 years undergoing a coronary angiography were enrolled. Lipids, Lp(a), autoantibodies, blood cell counts and monocyte subpopulations (classical, intermediate, non-classical) were analyzed. RESULTS: The patients were divided into two groups depending on the Lp(a) concentration: normal Lp(a) < 30 mg/dL (n = 82) and hyperLp(a) ≥ 30 mg/dL (n = 68). Patients of both groups were comparable by risk factors, autoantibody levels and blood cell counts. In patients with hyperlipoproteinemia(a) the content (absolute and relative) of non-classical monocytes was higher (71.0 (56.6; 105.7) vs. 62.2 (45.7; 82.4) 103/mL and 17.7 (13.0; 23.3) vs. 15.1 (11.4; 19.4) %, respectively, p < 0.05). The association of the relative content of non-classical monocytes with the Lp(a) concentration retained a statistical significance when adjusted for gender and age (r = 0.18, p = 0.03). The severity of coronary atherosclerosis was associated with the Lp(a) concentration as well as the relative and absolute (p < 0.05) content of classical monocytes. The high content of non-classical monocytes (OR = 3.5, 95% CI 1.2-10.8) as well as intermediate monocytes (OR = 8.7, 2.5-30.6) in patients with hyperlipoproteinemia(a) were associated with triple-vessel coronary disease compared with patients with a normal Lp(a) level and a low content of monocytes. CONCLUSION: Hyperlipoproteinemia(a) and a decreased quantity of classical monocytes were associated with the severity of coronary atherosclerosis. The expansion of CD16+ monocytes (intermediate and non-classical) in the presence of hyperlipoproteinemia(a) significantly increased the risk of triple-vessel coronary disease.

Management of multivessel coronary artery disease in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a complex path to precision medicine.

Recent analyses suggest the incidence of acute coronary syndrome is declining in high- and middle-income countries. Despite this, overall rates of non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) continue to rise. Furthermore, NSTEMI is a greater contributor to mortality after hospital discharge than ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Patients with NSTEMI are often older, comorbid and have a high likelihood of multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD), which is associated with worse clinical outcomes. Currently, optimal treatment strategies for MVD in NSTEMI are less well established than for STEMI or stable coronary artery disease. Specifically, in relation to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) there is a paucity of randomized, prospective data comparing multivessel and culprit lesion-only PCI. Given the heterogeneous pathological basis for NSTEMI with MVD, an approach of complete revascularization may not be appropriate or necessary in all patients. Recognizing this, this review summarizes the limited evidence base for the interventional management of non-culprit disease in NSTEMI by comparing culprit-only and multivessel PCI strategies. We then explore how a personalized, precise approach to investigation, therapy and follow up may be achieved based on patient-, disease- and lesion-specific factors.

Multivessel vs. culprit-only revascularization in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes and multivessel coronary disease. / Revascularização multivaso versus revascularização da artéria culprit em pacientes com síndrome coronária aguda sem supradesnivelamento do segmento ST e doença coronária multivaso.

INTRODUCTION: There have been no prospective randomized trials that enable the best strategy and timing to be determined for revascularization in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). OBJECTIVES: To compare short- and long-term adverse events following multivessel vs. culprit-only revascularization in patients with NSTE-ACS and multivessel CAD. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study that included all patients diagnosed with NSTE-ACS and multivessel CAD who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) between January 2010 and June 2013 (n=232). After exclusion of patients with previous coronary artery bypass grafting (n=30), a multivessel revascularization strategy was adopted in 35.1% of patients (n=71); in the others (n=131, 64.9%), only the culprit artery was revascularized. After propensity score matching (PSM), two groups of 66 patients were obtained, matched according to revascularization strategy. RESULTS: During follow-up (1543±545 days), after PSM, patients undergoing multivessel revascularization had lower rates of reinfarction (4.5% vs. 16.7%; log-rank p=0.018), unplanned revascularization (6.1% vs. 16.7%; log-rank p=0.048), unplanned PCI (3.0% vs. 13.6%; log-rank p=0.023) and the combined endpoint of death, reinfarction and unplanned revascularization (16.7 vs. 31.8%; log-rank p=0.046). CONCLUSIONS: In real-world patients presenting with NSTE-ACS and multivessel CAD, a multivessel revascularization strategy was associated with lower rates of reinfarction, unplanned revascularization and unplanned PCI, as well as a reduction in the combined endpoint of death, reinfarction and unplanned revascularization.

Comparison of clinical outcomes between culprit vessel only and multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel coronary diseases.

BACKGROUND: The clinical significance of complete revascularization for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients during admission is still debatable. METHODS: A total of 1406 STEMI patients from the Korean Myocardial Infarction Registry with multivessel diseases without cardiogenic shock who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) were analyzed. We used propensity score matching (PSM) to control differences of baseline characteristics between culprit only intervention (CP) and multivessel percutaneous coronary interventions (MP), and between double vessel disease (DVD) and triple vessel disease (TVD). The major adverse cardiac event (MACE) was analyzed for one year after discharge. RESULTS: TVD patients showed higher incidence of MACE (14.2% vs. 8.6%, P = 0.01), any cause of revascularization (10.6% vs. 5.9%, P = 0.01), and repeated PCI (9.5% vs. 5.7%, P = 0.02), as compared to DVD patients during one year after discharge. MP reduced MACE effectively (7.3% vs. 13.8%, P = 0.03), as compared to CP for one year, but all cause of death (1.6% vs. 3.2%, P = 0.38), MI (0.4% vs. 0.8%, P = 1.00), and any cause of revascularization (5.3% vs. 9.7%, P = 0.09) were comparable in the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: STEMI patients with TVD showed higher rate of MACE, as compared to DVD. MP performed during PPCI or ad hoc during admission for STEMI patients without cardiogenic shock showed lower rate of MACE in this large scaled database. Therefore, MP could be considered as an effective treatment option for STEMI patients without cardiogenic shock.

Completeness of revascularisation by percutaneous coronary intervention.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between the completeness of revascularisation by percutaneous coronary intervention and the one-year occurrence of adverse cardiac events in patients with multivessel disease. PATIENTS: Patients with stable or unstable angina pectoris, or with exercise-induced ischaemia, were enrolled in the Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularisation Investigation (CABRI). METHODS: In CABRI, patients were randomised to coronary bypass grafting (CABG; n=513) or angioplasty (PTCA; n=541). Revascularisation in patients randomised to PTCA was defined as complete if no lesions with a diameter stenosis <50% remained post-procedure. Patients with complete revascularisation were distinguished from those with one, two, and three or more remaining lesions, respectively. Differences in baseline characteristics and in the one-year occurrence of death, myocardial infarction, (re)CABG, and (re)PTCA between these subgroups were evaluated. Comparisons were made with patients randomised to CABG. RESULTS: Complete revascularisation was obtained in 148 patients randomised to PTCA (27%). In 147 (27%) cases one lesion remained, while there were 122 (23%) and 119 (22%) patients with two and three or more remaining lesions, respectively. Five (1%) patients could not be classified. The one-year rates of either death or MI were 9.5%, 5.4%, 8.2%, and 12.6% in the respective PTCA subgroups (p=0.225), and 6.2% in patients randomised to CABG (comparison with three or more remaining lesions after PTCA: p=0.017). The percentages of repeat interventions during one-year follow-up were 29.7%, 29.3%, 39.3%, and 51.3% (p<0.001), much higher than after CABG (3.5%; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Complete revascularisation by PTCA in multivessel coronary disease did not result in a lower death or MI rate compared with incomplete revascularisation. Overall the patient's prognosis after PTCA is similar to CABG, but patients with three or more remaining lesions after PTCA had a worse prognosis than CABG patients.

Hybrid revascularization in multivessel coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: Minimally invasive hybrid revascularization (MIHR) by means of the left mammary artery on the left anterior descending artery [minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB)] combined with percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) stenting may be an alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting through sternotomy or multiple PCI. The purpose of this study is to retrospectively evaluate the long-term outcomes of this strategy. METHODS: Since May 1997 up to January 2011, 810 MIDCAB have been performed as isolated revascularization in 644 patients. Since 2004, MIDCAB, as a part of hybrid revascularization, was associated with PCI in 166 patients. RESULTS: In the MIDCAB group, mean age was 64.6 ± 12.0, with 83.8% males. Two-vessel disease was 62.4%, three-vessel disease 37.6%. Overall mortality was 0.24%, perioperative acute myocardial infarction-1.6%, early reoperation-0.74%, reopening for bleeding-1.2%, case rate of haemotrasfusion-3.1%, with a mean hospital postoperative stay of 4 ± 2.5 days. Postoperative angiographic control prior to PCI and in symptomatic patients showed patent left internal mammary artery in 100% of cases. PCI was performed in 166 patients, 64.2% before MIDCAB and 35.8% after surgery (interval 2.2 ± 1.3 months). The mean follow-up in the MIDCAB group was 8.4 ± 3.2 years. In the MIHR group, at the mean follow-up of 4.5 ± 2.3 years, freedom from related cardiac death was 93% with freedom from cardiac reintervention of 83%. CONCLUSIONS: Our 13-year experience with MIDCAB demonstrates that the operation is safe and associated with a very low incidence of early and late complications. The hybrid approach provided excellent long-term outcome in terms of freedom from cardiac death and reoperation. Accurate patient selection, as well the timing of the hybrid procedure, is mandatory to optimize surgical and PCI results.

Revascularización del vaso culpable versus completa en enfermedad de múltiples vasos en infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST Metaanálisis de ensayos clínicos / Culprit vessel revascularization versus complete revascularization in multivessel disease in acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation Meta-analysis of clinical trials

Resumen Revascularización del vaso culpable versus completa en enfermedad de múltiples vasos en infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST: metaanálisis de ensayos clínicos. Introducción: se ha recomendado que en los pacientes con infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST se realice revascularización percutánea sólo del vaso culpable. Objetivos: evaluar el efecto de la revascularización percutánea sólo del vaso culpable en comparación a la completa, en pacientes con infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST de menos de 12 horas de evolución para disminuir desenlaces críticos. Material y métodos: se realizó una búsqueda sistemática en las bases de datos bibliográficas, resúmenes de congresos de cardiología y búsqueda manual de los estudios primarios incluidos en otros metaanálisis, de ensayos clínicos con asignación aleatoria de pacientes con infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST de menos de 12 horas de evolución. Resultados: la estrategia de revascularización percutánea completa no aumenta la mortalidad de cualquier causa RR 0.78 (IC 95% 0.44-1.39); ni la de origen cardiovascular RR 0,62 (IC 95% 0.27-1.44), y reduce la frecuencia de reinfartos RR 0.39 (IC 95% 0.2-0.76) y la frecuencia de reintervenciones RR 0.45 (IC 95% 0.31-0.65) en los pacientes con infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST, que se presentan durante las primeras 12 horas de evolución Conclusiones: en pacientes con infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST, quienes se presentan en las primeras 12 horas, la revascularización competa en enfermedad multi-vaso es segura y disminuye la frecuencia de eventos como reinfarto y necesidad de reintervención. (Acta Med Colomb 2016; 41: 116-124).

Abstract Culprit vessel revascularization versus complete revascularization in multivessel disease in acute myocardial infarction with ST segment elevation: meta-analysis of clinical trials. Introduction: it has been recommended to perform only culprit vessel revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation. Objectives: to evaluate the effect of percutaneous revascularization of only the culprit vessel compared to the complete in patients with acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation of less than 12 hours of evolution to reduce critical outcomes. Materials and Methods: a systematic search of the literature databases, abstracts of cardiology congress and manual search of primary studies included in other meta-analyzes of clinical randomized trials of patients with acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation of less than 12 hours of evolution, was performed. Results: complete percutaneous revascularization strategy does not increase mortality from any cause RR 0.78 (95% CI 0.44-1.39); nor that of cardiovascular origin RR 0.62 (95% CI 0.27-1.44), and reduces the frequency of reinfarction RR 0.39 (95% CI 0.2-0.76), and the frequency of reoperations RR 0.45 (95% CI 0.31 -0.65) in patients with acute myocardial infarction with ST segment elevation, occurring during the first 12 hours of evolution. Conclusions: in patients with acute myocardial infarction with ST segment elevation who consult in the first 12 hours, complete revascularization in multivessel disease is safe and decreases the frequency of events such as reinfarction and need for reoperation. (Acta Med Colomb 2016; 41: 116-124).