Incidence and predictors of intracranial bleeding after coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

Background: There is a paucity of direct data on the incidence and predictors of intracranial bleeding (ICB) after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). Methods: The Korean National Health Insurance database was used to identify patients without prior ICB who underwent CABG. The outcomes of interest were the time-dependent incidence rates of ICB and the associated mortality. Results: Among 35,021 patients who underwent CABG between 2007 and 2018, 895 (2.6%) experienced an ICB during a median follow-up of 6.0 years. The 1-year cumulative incidence of ICB was 0.76%, with a relatively high incidence rate (9.93 cases per 1,000 person-years) within the first 1-30 days. Subsequent incidence rates showed a sharp decline until 3 years, followed by a steady decrease up to 10 years. The 1-year mortality rate after ICB was 38.1%, with most deaths occurring within 30 days (23.6%). The predictors of ICB after CABG were age ≥ 75 years, hypertension, pre-existing dementia, history of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, and end-stage renal disease. Conclusions: In an unselected nationwide population undergoing CABG, the incidence of ICB was non-negligible and showed a relatively high incidence rate during the early postoperative period. Post-CABG ICB was associated with a high risk of premature death. Further research is needed to stratify high-risk patients and personalize therapeutic decisions for preventing ICB after CABG.

Electronic Medical Record-Based Machine Learning Approach to Predict the Risk of 30-Day Adverse Cardiac Events After Invasive Coronary Treatment: Machine Learning Model Development and Validation.

BACKGROUND: Although there is a growing interest in prediction models based on electronic medical records (EMRs) to identify patients at risk of adverse cardiac events following invasive coronary treatment, robust models fully utilizing EMR data are limited. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop and validate machine learning (ML) models by using diverse fields of EMR to predict the risk of 30-day adverse cardiac events after percutaneous intervention or bypass surgery. METHODS: EMR data of 5,184,565 records of 16,793 patients at a quaternary hospital between 2006 and 2016 were categorized into static basic (eg, demographics), dynamic time-series (eg, laboratory values), and cardiac-specific data (eg, coronary angiography). The data were randomly split into training, tuning, and testing sets in a ratio of 3:1:1. Each model was evaluated with 5-fold cross-validation and with an external EMR-based cohort at a tertiary hospital. Logistic regression (LR), random forest (RF), gradient boosting machine (GBM), and feedforward neural network (FNN) algorithms were applied. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality following invasive treatment. RESULTS: GBM showed the best performance with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 0.99; RF had a similar AUROC of 0.98. AUROCs of FNN and LR were 0.96 and 0.93, respectively. GBM had the highest area under the precision-recall curve (AUPRC) of 0.80, and the AUPRCs of RF, LR, and FNN were 0.73, 0.68, and 0.63, respectively. All models showed low Brier scores of <0.1 as well as highly fitted calibration plots, indicating a good fit of the ML-based models. On external validation, the GBM model demonstrated maximal performance with an AUROC of 0.90, while FNN had an AUROC of 0.85. The AUROCs of LR and RF were slightly lower at 0.80 and 0.79, respectively. The AUPRCs of GBM, LR, and FNN were similar at 0.47, 0.43, and 0.41, respectively, while that of RF was lower at 0.33. Among the categories in the GBM model, time-series dynamic data demonstrated a high AUROC of >0.95, contributing majorly to the excellent results. CONCLUSIONS: Exploiting the diverse fields of the EMR data set, the ML-based 30-day adverse cardiac event prediction models demonstrated outstanding results, and the applied framework could be generalized for various health care prediction models.

Histologic Evaluation Using the Robarts Histopathology Index in Patients With Ulcerative Colitis in Deep Remission and the Association of Histologic Remission With Risk of Relapse.

BACKGROUND: This study prospectively evaluated the risk of relapse according to the status of histologic activity in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who achieved deep remission. METHODS: Patients with UC in clinical remission (partial Mayo score ≤1) and endoscopic remission (ulcerative colitis endoscopic index of severity ≤1) were enrolled. Rectal biopsies were performed in patients, and histologic remission was defined as a Robarts histopathology index of ≤3. Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis was conducted to determine fecal calprotectin cutoff values for histologic remission. The cumulative risk of relapse was evaluated using the Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Among the 187 patients enrolled, 82 (43.9%) achieved histologic remission. The best cutoff value of fecal calprotectin for predicting histologic remission was 80 mg/kg (area under the curve of 0.646, sensitivity of 74%, and specificity of 61%). Among 142 patients who were followed up for >3 months, 56 (39.4%) showed clinical relapse during a median of 42 weeks. The risk of relapse was lower in patients with histologic remission than in those with histologic activity (P = .026). In multivariable analysis, histologic remission (hazard ratio [HR], 0.551; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.316-0.958; P = .035), elevated C-reactive protein levels (HR, 3.652; 95% CI, 1.400-9.526; P = .008), and history of steroid use (HR, 2.398; 95% CI, 1.196-4.808; P = .014) were significantly associated with clinical relapse. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with UC who achieved clinical and endoscopic remission, histologic remission was independently associated with a lower risk of clinical relapse.

In patients with ulcerative colitis who achieved clinical and endoscopic remission, histologic remission was independently associated with a lower risk of clinical relapse. This benefit of reaching histologic remission was maintained regardless of treatment de-escalation.

Ten-year Outcomes After Drug-Eluting Stents or Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Disease in Patients With and Without Diabetes Mellitus: The PRECOMBAT Extended Follow-Up Study.

Background Several trials reported differential outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DES) and coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) for multivessel coronary disease according to the presence of diabetes mellitus (DM). However, it is not well recognized how DM status affects very-long-term (10-year) outcomes after DES and CABG for left main coronary artery disease. Methods and Results In the PRECOMBAT (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) trial, patients with LMCA were randomly assigned to undergo PCI with sirolimus-eluting stents (n=300) or CABG (n=300). The primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE; a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization). Outcomes were examined in patients with (n=192) and without (n=408) medically treated diabetes. The follow-up was extended to at least 10 years for all patients (median, 11.3 years). The 10-year rates of MACCE were not significantly different between DES and CABG in patients with DM (36.3% versus 26.7%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 1.35; 95% CI, 0.83-2.19; P=0.23) and without DM (25.3% versus 22.9%, respectively; HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.79-1.67; P=0.48) (P-for-interaction=0.48). There were no significant between-group differences in composite of death, MI, or stroke, and all-cause mortality, regardless of DM status. TVR rates were consistently higher after DES than CABG. Conclusions In this 10-year extended follow-up of PRECOMBAT, we found no significant difference between DES and CABG with respect to the incidences of MACCE, serious composite outcome, and all-cause mortality in patients with and without DM with LMCA disease. However, owing to the limited number of patients and no adjustment for multiple testing, overall findings should be considered hypothesis-generating, highlighting the need for further research. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03871127 and NCT00422968.

Comparison of optical coherence tomography-guided versus intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention: Rationale and design of a randomized, controlled OCTIVUS trial.

BACKGROUND: The clinical value of intracoronary imaging for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) guidance is well acknowledged. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) are the most commonly used intravascular imaging to guide and optimize PCI in day-to-day practice. However, the comparative effectiveness of IVUS-guided versus OCT-guided PCI with respect to clinical end points remains unknown. METHODS AND DESIGN: The OCTIVUS study is a prospective, multicenter, open-label, parallel-arm, randomized trial comparing the effectiveness of 2 imaging-guided strategies in patients with stable angina or acute coronary syndromes undergoing PCI in Korea. A total of 2,000 patients are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either an OCT-guided PCI strategy or an IVUS-guided PCI strategy. The trial uses a pragmatic comparative effectiveness design with inclusion criteria designed to capture a broad range of real-world patients with diverse clinical and anatomical features. PCI optimization criteria are predefined using a common algorithm for online OCT or IVUS. The primary end point, which was tested for both noninferiority (margin, 3.1 percentage points for the risk difference) and superiority, is target-vessel failure (cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization) at 1 year. RESULTS: Up to the end of July 2020, approximately 1,200 "real-world" PCI patients have been randomly enrolled over 2 years. Enrollment is expected to be completed around the midterm of 2021, and primary results will be available by late 2022 or early 2023. CONCLUSION: This large-scale, multicenter, pragmatic-design clinical trial will provide valuable clinical evidence on the relative efficacy and safety of OCT-guided versus IVUS-guided PCI strategies in a broad population of patients undergoing PCI in the daily clinical practice.

Randomized Trial Evaluating Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for the Treatment of Chronic Total Occlusion.

BACKGROUND: Procedural results for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in coronary vessels with chronic total occlusion (CTO) have improved in recent years, and PCI strategies have moved toward more complete revascularization with more liberal use of CTO-PCI. However, evidence evaluating CTO-PCI is limited to observational studies and small clinical trials. METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial, PCI-eligible patients were assigned to receive either 1 of 2 strategies: PCI or no PCI for the qualifying de novo CTO lesion with the option for PCI of obstructive non-CTO lesions at the discretion of the operator. The primary end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or any revascularization. Health-related quality of life was assessed at baseline and at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. Because of slow recruitment, the trial was stopped before completion of the 1284 planned enrollments. RESULTS: Between March 2010 and September 2016, 834 patients were randomly assigned to the CTO-PCI (n=417) or no CTO-PCI (n=398) strategy. Among the patients assigned to the no CTO-PCI strategy, 78 (19.6%) crossed over to receive staged CTO-PCI within 3 days of randomization. The overall CTO-PCI success rate was 90.6%. Serious nonfatal complications associated with CTO-PCI occurred in 3 patients (1 stroke, 1 cardiac tamponade, and 1 patient with recurrent episodes of ventricular tachyarrhythmia induced by intracoronary thrombus). Approximately half of the patients in each group underwent PCI for an average of 1.3 non-CTO lesions, resulting in a comparable residual SYNTAX score (Synergy Between PCI With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery; 3.7±5.4 versus 4.0±5.9, P=0.42) confined to non-CTO vessels. During a median follow-up of 4.0 years (interquartile range, 2.4 to 5.1 years), there was no significant difference between the CTO-PCI and the no CTO-PCI strategies in the incidence of the primary end point (22.3% versus 22.4%, hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.37; P=0.86). Both CTO-PCI and no CTO-PCI strategy were associated with significant improvements but without between-group differences in disease-specific health status that was sustained through 36 months. CONCLUSIONS: CTO-PCI was feasible with high success rates. There was no difference in the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events with CTO-PCI versus no CTO-PCI, but the study was limited by low power for clinical end points and high crossover rates between groups. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01078051.

Fate of Grafts Bypassing Nonischemic Versus Ischemic Inducing Coronary Stenosis.

There is a lack of evidence regarding the efficacy of ischemia-guided coronary artery bypass grafting. We compared the incidence of graft failure between grafts bypassing ischemia-inducing and nonischemia-inducing stenoses. Between 1997 and 2011, 2,304 patients for whom baseline coronary angiography and myocardial perfusion imaging were available were identified from a single-center coronary artery bypass grafting registry. According to baseline myocardial perfusion imaging, each graft was assigned to either graft bypassing ischemia-inducing or nonischemia-inducing stenoses (ischemia-related grafts, n = 4,904; ischemia-unrelated grafts, n = 2,709). Graft failure was defined as total occlusion on coronary computed tomography angiography, performed at the discretion of the treating physician. The incidence of graft failure was compared on a per-graft basis. At 5 years, the incidence of graft failure was significantly higher in the ischemia-unrelated grafts (4.2% vs 2.9% in ischemia-related grafts; p = 0.003). Ischemia-related graft was an independent determinant of graft patency (adjusted hazard ratio 0.61; 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 0.84; p = 0.002). Increased risk of graft failure associated with ischemia-unrelated graft was observed only in the internal thoracic artery (3.3% vs 2.0%, p = 0.021) and arterial grafts (6.5% vs 4.3%, p = 0.020), but not in the venous grafts (2.7% vs 2.7%; p = 0.99). In terms of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, 5-year incidences were comparable between the patients with and without ischemia-unrelated grafts (219, 19.3% vs 160, 18.0%; p = 0.61). In conclusion, ischemia-unrelated grafts became dysfunctional more frequently than ischemia-related grafts, and were not preventive of adverse events.

Safety and Effectiveness of Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on the relative performances between different types of drug-eluting stents (DES) for obstructive left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare effectiveness and safety profiles of various second-generation DES for LMCAD in real-world clinical practice. METHODS: Among 4,470 patients in 3, multicenter, prospective registries (IRIS-DES [Interventional Cardiology Research Incorporation Society-Drug-Eluting Stents] registry, the IRIS-MAIN [Interventional Cardiology Research Incorporation Society-Left MAIN Revascularization] registry, and the PRECOMBAT [PREmier of Randomized COMparison of Bypass Surgery versus AngioplasTy Using Drug-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease] study) treated between July 2007 and July 2015, the authors identified 2,692 patients with significant LMCAD who received second-generation DES; 1,254 with cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (CoCr-EES), 232 with biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents (BP-BES), 616 with platinum-chromium EES (PtCr-EES), and 590 with Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (Re-ZES). The primary outcome was target-vessel failure. RESULTS: The observed 3-year rates of target-vessel failure were not significantly different for the different types of DES (16.7% for the CoCr-EES, 13.2% for the BP-BES, 18.7% for the PtCr-EES, and 14.7% for the Re-ZES; p = 0.15). In multiple treatment propensity score analysis, the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for target-vessel failure were similar in between-group comparisons of the different DES, except for the PtCr-EES versus the BP-BES (reference; HR: 1.60; 95% confidence interval: 1.01 to 2.54; p = 0.046). There were no significant differences in risk of composite of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularization and its individual components according to the different types of DES. Although the 3-year incidence of stent thrombosis was considerably low (≤1.0%) for all types of DES, between-group differences were observed, generally favoring the EES platforms. CONCLUSIONS: In this pooled analysis of 3 prospective registries involving unrestricted use of various second-generation DES for LMCAD, we found no significant between-group differences in 3-year risk of target-vessel failure, except for a higher risk of primary outcome with PtCr-EES compared to BP-BES. (Evaluation of the First, Second, and New Drug-Eluting Stents in Routine Clinical Practice [IRIS-DES]; NCT01186133).

Comparison of a Simple Angiographic Approach With a Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery Score-Based Approach for Left Main Coronary Artery Stenting: A Pooled Analysis of Serial PRECOMBAT (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery Versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease) Studies.

BACKGROUND: The applicability of Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery scores to left main coronary artery disease (CAD) has been questioned. A simplified alternative is needed for guiding decision making. METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated the prognostic value of a simplified angiographic classification in comparison with a Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery score-based approach for patients with left main CAD undergoing drug-eluting stent implantation. The proposed approach classified left main CAD as either extensive (n=819), defined as left main bifurcation lesions with an involvement of ostial left circumflex artery or as any left main lesion plus multivessel CAD, or limited (n=453), defined as ostial/midshaft lesions or left main bifurcation lesions without an involvement of ostium of left circumflex artery, alone or plus 1-vessel disease. The databases from 4 prospective Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease studies were pooled, and the primary outcome was a major adverse cardiac event, defined as death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization. During follow-up (median 38 months; interquartile range, 36-61 months), the risk for major adverse cardiac event was significantly higher with extensive than with limited left main CAD (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.13; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-2.94; P<0.001). The risk for a composite outcome of death or myocardial infarction was also higher with extensive left main CAD (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-2.85; P=0.02). However, Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery score tertiles did not effectively stratify these 2 outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery scores, the simpler angiographic approach provided better discrimination for future cardiovascular events in patients with left main CAD undergoing drug-eluting stent implantation.

Coronary CT angiography characteristics of OCT-defined thin-cap fibroatheroma: a section-to-section comparison study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether plaque characteristics as assessed by coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) were associated with the presence of a thin-cap fibroatheroma (TCFA)-a precursor of plaque rupture-defined by optical coherence tomography (OCT) in a section-to-section-level comparison. METHODS: From 28 symptomatic patients, 31 coronary lesions were evaluated on 727 cross-sections co-registered by both CCTA and OCT. CCTA plaque characteristics included low attenuation plaque (LAP, <30 HU), napkin ring sign (NRS), positive remodelling (PR, remodelling index ≥1.10), and spotty calcification and plaque area and plaque burden. By OCT, presence of TCFA, lumen area and arc of lipid were determined. RESULTS: OCT revealed a TCFA in 69 (9.4%) sections from 19 (61.2 %) lesions. In per-section analysis, OCT-TCFA showed higher frequency of CCTA-detected LAP (58.0% vs. 18.5%), NRS (31.9% vs. 8.8%) and PR (68.1% vs. 48.0%) and greater plaque burden (70.6% vs. 61.9%) as compared to sections without OCT-TCFA (all p < 0.05). In multivariable analysis, LAP (odds ratio [OR] 4.05, p < 0.001) and NRS (OR 2.47, p = 0.005) were associated with OCT-TCFA. CCTA-measured lumen area correlated well with OCT-measured lumen area (R = 0.859, limits of agreement -0.5 ± 3.7 mm2). CONCLUSIONS: LAP and NRS in CCTA were associated with the presence of OCT-defined TCFA in a section-to-section comparison. KEY POINTS: • CT-defined LAP and NRS were associated with OCT-defined TCFA • OCT-TCFA showed higher frequency of LAP, NRS, PR and greater plaque burden • Non-calcified plaque area was correlated with OCT-measured lipid arc.

Long-term outcomes of bypass grafting versus drug-eluting stenting for left main coronary artery disease: Results from the IRIS-MAIN registry.

There are limited data on comparative outcomes and its determinants following coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) for left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) in a real-world setting. METHODS: A total of 3,504 consecutive patients with LMCAD treated with CABG (n=1,301) or PCI with DES (n=2,203) from the IRIS-MAIN registry were analyzed. The relative treatment effect of one strategy over another was assessed by propensity-score matching method. The primary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. RESULTS: Median follow-up duration was 4.7 years. In the matched cohort, both groups demonstrated a similar risk for the primary outcome (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.77-1.15; P=.54). Compared with CABG, PCI exhibited higher risks of myocardial infarction (HR: 2.11; 95% CI: 1.16-3.83; P=.01) and repeated revascularization (HR: 5.95; 95% CI: 3.94-8.98; P<.001). In the overall population, age, presence of chronic kidney disease, and low ejection fraction (<40%) were key clinical predictors of primary outcome regardless of the treatment strategy. However, factors deemed to be associated with perioperative morbidity were determinants of primary outcome in the CABG group, whereas those generally associated with the severity of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease were strong predictors in the PCI group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with significant LMCAD, the long-term risk of the composite outcome of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was similar between CABG and PCI. Clinical variables that differentially predict adverse outcomes might be useful in triaging appropriate revascularization strategy.

Differential Rates and Clinical Significance of Periprocedural Myocardial Infarction After Stenting or Bypass Surgery for Multivessel Coronary Disease According to Various Definitions.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to estimate the differential incidence and prognostic significance of periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI) according to various definitions. BACKGROUND: In trials comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), the primary composite endpoint is very sensitive to the definition of MI. Especially, the definition of periprocedural MI has considerably varied, and uniform criteria are still unsettled. METHODS: We evaluated 7,697 patients with multivessel disease who received PCI (n = 4,514) or underwent CABG (n = 3,183) between 2003 and 2013, and for whom serial measurement of creatine kinase-MB was available. According to various MI definitions (second and third universal definitions and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions definition), we assessed the prevalence and prognostic significance of periprocedural MI after both PCI and CABG. Patients were followed for major cardiovascular events (death from cardiovascular causes and spontaneous MI) and death for a median of 4.7 years. RESULTS: According to various definitions of MI, there was a substantial difference in the rates of periprocedural MI after PCI and CABG (18.7% vs. 2.9% by second universal; 3.2% vs. 1.9% by third universal; and 5.5% vs. 18.3% by Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions definition). The presence of periprocedural MI was associated with increased risks of major cardiovascular events after both PCI and CABG regardless of MI definition. The risk-adjusted 5-year rates of future major cardiovascular events after occurrence of periprocedural MI were similar after PCI and CABG in second and third universal definition. However, using Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions definition, the rates of major cardiovascular events were significantly higher after PCI than after CABG (24.3% vs. 20.4%; hazard ratio: 1.61; 95% confidence interval: 1.07 to 2.41; p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: There were substantial differences in incidence and clinical relevance of periprocedural MI according to various contemporary, widely used definitions of MI.

Generalizability of EXCEL and NOBLE results to a large registry population with unprotected left main coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine how trial-based findings of EXCEL and NOBLE might be interpreted and generalizable in 'real-world' settings with comparison of data from the large-scaled, all-comer Interventional Research Incorporation Society-Left MAIN Revascularization (IRIS-MAIN) registry. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We compared baseline clinical and procedural characteristics and also determined how the relative treatment effect of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was different in EXCEL and NOBLE, compared with those of the multicenter, IRIS-MAIN registry (n=2481). The primary outcome for between-study comparison was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. RESULTS: There were between-study differences in patient risk profiles (age, BMI, diabetes, and clinical presentation), lesion complexities, and procedural characteristics (stent type, the use of off-pump surgery, and radial artery); the proportion of diabetes and acute coronary syndrome was particularly lower in NOBLE than in other studies. Although there was interstudy heterogeneity for the protocol definition of MI, the risks for serious composite outcome of death, MI, or stroke were similar between PCI and CABG in EXCEL [hazard ratio (HR): 1.00; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.79-1.26; P=0.98] and in the matched cohort of IRIS-MAIN (HR: 1.08; 95%CI: 0.85-1.38; P=0.53), whereas it was significantly higher after PCI than after CABG in NOBLE (HR: 1.47; 95%CI: 1.06-2.05; P=0.02), which was driven by more common MI and stroke after PCI. CONCLUSION: In the comparison of a large-sized, all-comer registry, the EXCEL trial might represent better generalizability with respect to baseline characteristics and observed clinical outcomes compared with the NOBLE trial.

Comparative determinants of 5-year cardiovascular event rates in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus (DM), low ejection fraction (EF), and the extent of coronary artery disease (CAD) have all been identified as predictors of cardiovascular events in multivessel disease, but their comparative contributions to future risk remain unclear in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. Through this study we aimed to categorize the risk for cardiovascular events in patients with ULMCA disease using simple clinical descriptors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Our study included a total of 5975 patients with ULMCA disease from the Interventional Research Incorporation Society-Left MAIN Revascularization registry who were treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (n=2850), coronary artery bypass grafting (n=2337), or medical therapy alone (n=608). We categorized the risk for cardiovascular events using simple clinical descriptors (DM, low EF, and the extent of CAD). The primary outcome was a major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (MACCE) (i.e. death from any cause, stroke, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization). RESULTS: Overall, the 5-year rate of MACCE was highest in the medical group, lower in the percutaneous coronary intervention group, and lowest in the coronary artery bypass grafting group (42.5, 25.7, and 19.9%, respectively; P<0.001). In multivariable modeling, the presence of DM [hazard ratio (HR): 1.25; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.12-1.40; P<0.001], low EF of 40% or less (HR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.56-2.15; P<0.001), and the extent of CAD (HR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.08-1.21; P<0.001) were independent predictors of MACCE; in addition, these factors were consistently associated with a significantly higher risk for MACCE, regardless of index treatment strategies. CONCLUSION: Simple clinical descriptors can assist clinicians in identifying high-risk patients and in predicting future cardiovascular events within the broad range of risk factors for ULMCA disease.

Differential Event Rates and Independent Predictors of Long-Term Major Cardiovascular Events and Death in 5795 Patients With Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Treated With Stents, Bypass Surgery, or Medication: Insights From a Large International Multicenter Registry.

BACKGROUND: Identifying predictive factors for major cardiovascular events and death in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease is of great clinical value for risk stratification and possible guidance for tailored preventive strategies. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Interventional Research Incorporation Society-Left MAIN Revascularization registry included 5795 patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease (percutaneous coronary intervention, n=2850; coronary-artery bypass grafting, n=2337; medication alone, n=608). We analyzed the incidence and independent predictors of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; a composite of death, MI, stroke, or repeat revascularization) and all-cause mortality in each treatment stratum. During follow-up (median, 4.3 years), the rates of MACCE and death were substantially higher in the medical group than in the percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary-artery bypass grafting groups (P<0.001). In the percutaneous coronary intervention group, the 3 strongest predictors for MACCE were chronic renal failure, old age (≥65 years), and previous heart failure; those for all-cause mortality were chronic renal failure, old age, and low ejection fraction. In the coronary-artery bypass grafting group, old age, chronic renal failure, and low ejection fraction were the 3 strongest predictors of MACCE and death. In the medication group, old age, low ejection fraction, and diabetes mellitus were the 3 strongest predictors of MACCE and death. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease, the key clinical predictors for MACCE and death were generally similar regardless of index treatment. This study provides effect estimates for clinically relevant predictors of long-term clinical outcomes in real-world left main coronary artery patients, providing possible guidance for tailored preventive strategies. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01341327.

Comparison of Stenting Versus Bypass Surgery According to the Completeness of Revascularization in Severe Coronary Artery Disease: Patient-Level Pooled Analysis of the SYNTAX, PRECOMBAT, and BEST Trials.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare long-term survival between patients with severe coronary artery disease undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) achieving complete revascularization (CR) or incomplete revascularization. BACKGROUND: The importance of CR in decision making regarding revascularization strategy in patients with severe coronary artery disease is unknown. METHODS: Data were pooled from the SYNTAX (Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery), PRECOMBAT (Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery Versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease), and BEST (Randomized Comparison of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery and Everolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation in the Treatment of Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease) trials. The primary outcome was death from any cause and was compared in an as-treated analysis. RESULTS: The rate of CR was 61.7% (57.2% with PCI and 66.8% with CABG). During a median 4.9-year follow-up period (interquartile range: 4.5 to 5.0 years), compared with patients undergoing CABG with CR, those undergoing PCI with incomplete revascularization had a higher risk for death from any cause (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.43; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03 to 2.00; p = 0.036) and the composite of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke (aHR: 1.48; 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.92; p = 0.003). However, there was no significant difference between patients undergoing CABG with CR and those undergoing PCI with CR regarding the risk for death from any cause (aHR: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.63; p = 0.39) and the composite of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke (aHR: 1.14; 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.48; p = 0.35). Subgroup analysis of multivessel coronary disease, high SYNTAX score (>32), and diabetes showed consistent findings. CONCLUSIONS: For the treatment of left main or multivessel coronary artery disease, PCI resulting in CR was associated with a similar long-term survival rate to CABG resulting in CR. Therefore, the ability to achieve CR should enter into the decision algorithm for choice of revascularization strategy.

Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting vs. Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation for Multivessel Disease in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is currently a limited amount of data that demonstrate the optimal revascularization strategy for chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). We compared the long-term outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) for multivessel CAD in patients with CKD. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We analyzed 2108 CKD patients (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2) with multivessel CAD that were treated with PCI with DES (n=1165) or CABG (n=943). The primary outcome was a composite of all causes of mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The mean age was 66.9±9.1 years. RESULTS: Median follow-up duration was 41.4 (interquartile range 12.1-75.5) months. The primary outcome occurred in 307 (26.4%) patients in the PCI group compared with 304 (32.2%) patients in the CABG group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.941; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-1.12; p=0.493). The two groups exhibited similar rates of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.77-1.09; p=0.295), myocardial infarction (adjusted HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 0.85-4.07; p=0.120) and stroke (3.2% vs. 4.8%; HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.57-1.61; p=0.758). However, PCI was associated with significantly increased rates of repeat revascularization (adjusted HR, 4.72; 95% CI, 3.20-6.96; p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Among patients with CKD and multivessel CAD, PCI with DES when compared with CABG resulted in similar rates of composite outcome of mortality from any cause, MI, or stroke; however, a higher risk of repeat revascularization was observed.

Comparison of Outcome of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation for Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome.

There is limited data comparing effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents in patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS). We compared the long-term outcomes of the 2 revascularization strategies in 1,246 patients presented with NSTE-ACS for left main or multivessel coronary artery disease. Data were pooled from the Randomized Comparison of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery and Everolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation in the Treatment of Patients with Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease (BEST) trial, the Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease (PRECOMBAT) trial, and the Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 study groups. During the median follow-up of 60 months, the rate of the primary outcome was significantly lower with CABG than with PCI (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56 to 0.98; p = 0.036). This difference was mainly attributed to a significant reduction in the rate of myocardial infarction (HR 0.50; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.82, p = 0.006). The superiority of CABG over PCI was consistent across the major subgroups. The individual risks of death from any causes or stroke were not different between the 2 groups. In contrast, the rate of repeat revascularization was significantly lower in the CABG group than in the PCI group (HR 0.56; 95% CI 0.41 to 0.75, p <0.001). In this study, among patients with NSTE-ACS for left main or multivessel coronary artery disease, CABG significantly reduces the risk of death from any causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke compared with PCI with drug-eluting stents.

Comparison of Outcomes of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation in Patients With Severe Left Ventricular Dysfunction.

The optimal revascularization strategy for patients with significant coronary artery disease (CAD) and severe left ventricular (LV) dysfunction (ejection fraction ≤35%) remains unclear. We compared the effects of coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG, n = 442) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (n = 469) on long-term mortality in 911 patients with significant CAD and severe LV dysfunction using large real-world registry data. Databases of 3 real-world registries were merged for a patient-level meta-analysis. Primary outcome was death from any cause; secondary outcomes were death from cardiac causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization. At a median follow-up of 37.3 months, the risk of all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31 to 0.61; p <0.001) was significantly lower in the CABG group than in the PCI group after adjustment. Similar findings were observed with regard to the risks of death from cardiac cause (adjusted HR 0.49; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.73; p <0.001) and repeat revascularization (adjusted HR 0.08; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.20; p <0.001). However, there were no significant differences in the risks of myocardial infarction and stroke between the 2 groups. The superiority of CABG over PCI was particularly pronounced in patients receiving ß blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blockers than those who are not. In conclusion, among patients with significant CAD and severe LV dysfunction, CABG showed a lower risk of all-cause death, cardiac-cause death, and repeat revascularization compared with PCI with drug-eluting stents.

Coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus drug-eluting stent implantation for high-surgical-risk patients with left main or multivessel coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: There are limited data comparing long-term outcomes of coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with high surgical risk. We evaluated 5-year outcomes following CABG versus PCI with DES in 598 patients with left main or multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) and a high surgical risk [EuroSCORE (European system for cardiac operative risk evaluation) ≥ 6]. METHODS: Databases were merged from the BEST, PRECOMBAT and SYNTAX trials. The primary outcome was a major adverse cardio-cerebral event (MACCE), defined as the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke or repeat revascularization. RESULTS: During 5-year follow-up, the rates of MACCE were 29.4% in the CABG group and 43.8% in the PCI group [hazard ratio (HR), 0.64; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.49 - 0.84; P = 0.001]. The MACCE was significantly better with CABG than with PCI in patients with high and intermediate SYNTAX scores (34.9% vs 46.3%, P = 0.039, and 29.7% vs 47.6%, P = 0.010, respectively), but comparable between the two groups in those with low SYNTAX scores. The rates of all-cause death and stroke were similar between the two groups. However, CABG was associated with fewer myocardial infarctions (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.27 - 0.93; P = 0.027) and repeat revascularizations (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.20 - 0.52; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among high surgical risk patients with left main or multivessel CAD, CABG compared to PCI with DES was associated with a lower rate of MACCE.