Real-world long-term survival after non-emergent percutaneous coronary intervention to unprotected left main coronary artery - From the Melbourne Interventional Group (MIG) registry.

BACKGROUND: Current evidence suggests that percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main coronary artery disease (LMPCI) in selected patients is a safe alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting. However, real-world long-term survival data is limited. METHODS: We analyzed 24,644 patients from the MIG (Melbourne Interventional Group) registry between 2005 and 2020. We compared baseline clinical and procedural characteristics, in-hospital and 30-day outcomes, and long-term survival between unprotected LMPCI and non-LMPCI among patients without ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or cardiac arrest. RESULTS: Unprotected LMPCI patients (n = 185) were significantly older (mean age 72.0 vs. 64.6 years, p < 0.001), had higher prevalence of impaired ejection fraction (EF <50 %; 27.3 % vs. 14.9 %, p < 0.001) and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 ml/min/1.73m2 (40.9 % vs. 21.5 %, p < 0.001), and had greater use of intravascular ultrasound (21 % vs. 1 %, p < 0.001) and drug-eluting stents (p < 0.001). LMPCI was associated with longer hospital stay (4 days vs. 2 days, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in other in-hospital outcomes, 30-day mortality (0.6 % vs. 0.6 %, p = 0.90), and major adverse cardiac events (1.7 % vs. 3 %, p = 0.28). Although the unadjusted Kaplan-Meier survival to 8 years was significantly less with LMPCI compared to non-LMPCI (p < 0.01), LMPCI was not a predictor of long-term survival up to 8 years after Cox regression analysis (HR 0.67, 95 % CI 0.40-1.13, p = 0.13). CONCLUSION: In this study, non-emergent unprotected LMPCI was uncommonly performed, and IVUS was underutilized. Despite greater co-morbidities, LMPCI patients had comparable 30-day outcomes to non-LMPCI, and LMPCI was not an independent predictor of long-term mortality.

Reperfusion Times and Outcomes in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Presenting Without Pre-Hospital Notification.

BACKGROUND: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is recommended within 90 min of first medical contact. Those without pre-hospital notification (PN) are less likely to meet reperfusion targets and are an understudied subset of the STEMI population. METHODS: An observational cohort study from a multicentre PCI registry of consecutive patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI between 2012 and 2017. Exclusion criteria included out-of-hospital cardiac arrest, prior thrombolysis, symptom onset >12 h prior, and cardiogenic shock. RESULTS: 2519 patients were included: 1392 (55.3%) without PN (no-PN group) and 1127 (44.7%) with PN (PN group). Those without PN had longer median DTBT (78 min vs 51 min, p < 0.001) and STBT (206 min vs 161 min, p < 0.001), with only 55% meeting DTBT targets out-of-hours in the no-PN group. No-PN patients had lower rates of AHA/ACC type B2/C lesions, GP IIb/IIIa use, aspiration thrombectomy and had smaller stent diameter (all p ≤ 0.003), suggesting smaller areas of ischemic myocardium. There were no significant differences in 30-day MACE (no-PN 5.6% vs PN 6.5%, p = 0.36) or long-term National Death Index linked mortality (no-PN 6.2% vs PN 7.9%, p = 0.09). Lack of PN did not independently predict long-term mortality. CONCLUSION: Despite comparably excellent outcomes overall, those without PN had longer ischemic times and were less likely to meet DTBT targets, especially after hours. Ischemic times may be a better evaluation of PN networks than hard clinical outcomes, and efficient systems of care tailored to the individual health service are essential to ensure timely reperfusion of patients with STEMI.

Long-term outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention to an unprotected left main coronary artery in cardiogenic shock.

BACKGROUND: In cardiogenic shock with severe left main coronary artery stenosis (LM), limited information exists on short and longer-term outcomes. We sought to determine the outcomes of unprotected LM PCI in cardiogenic shock. METHODS: Excluding patients with previous CABG, consecutive patients undergoing PCI in cardiogenic shock from the Melbourne Intervention Group registry between 2005 and 2013 were analysed. Those post LM PCI were compared to those post non-LM PCI. Patient and procedural data were collected with 30-day and 12-month follow-up. Australian National Death Index linkage was performed for long-term mortality analysis. RESULTS: After excluding previous CABG, 18,069 procedures were performed during 1st January 2005 to 30th November 2013, 601 procedures in the setting of cardiogenic shock. Of these, 45 were performed to an isolated LM and 556 to a non-LM. Those with LM PCI were older and more likely to have a baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of <45%. The in-hospital, 30-day, 12-month and long-term mortality to 9 years in cardiogenic shock after LM PCI was 64.4%, 66.7%, 73.3% and 80.0% compared to 36.5%, 36.9%, 40.5% and 46.0%, after non-LM PCI (p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, LM PCI was a significant independent predictor of long-term mortality (HR1.59, 95%CI 1.00-2.53, p = 0.048). Landmark analysis of survivors to discharge found the long-term mortality of LM PCI approaches 60% compared to 27% for those with non-LM PCI (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Long-term outcomes after PCI to LM in cardiogenic shock are poor, with much of the excess in mortality occurring early. However, reasonable long-term survival was found beyond the initial high-risk period.