Meta-Analysis of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Left Main Narrowing.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for patients with left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) have reported conflicting results. We performed a systematic review up to May 23, 2021, and 1-stage reconstructed individual patient data meta-analysis (IPDMA) to compare outcomes between both groups. The primary outcome was 10-year all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and unplanned revascularization at 5 years. We performed individual patient data meta-analysis using published Kaplan-Meier curves to provide individual data points in coordinates and numbers at risk were used to increase the calibration accuracy of the reconstructed data. Shared frailty model or, when proportionality assumptions were not met, a restricted mean survival time model were fitted to compare outcomes between treatment groups. Of 583 articles retrieved, 5 RCTs were included. A total of 4,595 patients from these 5 RCTs were randomly assigned to PCI (n = 2,297) or CABG (n = 2,298). The cumulative 10-year all-cause mortality after PCI and CABG was 12.0% versus 10.6%, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 1.093, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.925 to 1.292; p = 0.296). PCI conferred similar time-to-MI (restricted mean survival time ratio 1.006, 95% CI 0.992 to 1.021, p=0.391) and stroke (restricted mean survival time ratio 1.005, 95% CI 0.998 to 1.013, p = 0.133) at 5 years. Unplanned revascularization was more frequent after PCI than CABG (HR 1.807, 95% CI 1.524 to 2.144, p <0.001) at 5 years. This meta-analysis using reconstructed participant-level time-to-event data showed no statistically significant difference in cumulative 10-year all-cause mortality between PCI versus CABG in the treatment of LMCAD.

Meta-Analysis Comparing Risk Factors, Incidence, and Outcomes of Patients With Versus Without Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Current guidelines on the management of patients with aortic valvular disease have widened the use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with an emphasis on avoidance of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM). This study sought to examine the incidence, risk factors, and all-cause mortality of PPM after TAVI. Medline and Embase databases were searched from inception to August 10, 2021. Patients were compared along 2 arms: (1) any degree of PPM and those without PPM, (2) severe PPM, and nonsevere PPM. A total of 22 articles involving 115,442 patients after TAVI were included. Pooled incidence for any degree of PPM was 30.1% and 10.7% in severe PPM. Incidence was significantly higher (p <0.001) for any degree of PPM in Europe (33.1%) and North America (34.4%) compared with Asia (10.4%). Incidence of severe PPM was higher (p = 0.015) in older generation (13.6%) compared with current-generation valves (6.3%). Severe PPM increased the risk of all-cause mortality relative to nonsevere PPM (hazard ratio: 1.86, 95% confidence interval: 1.05 to 3.29, p = 0.034). Patients of younger age, increased body surface area, lower left ventricular ejection fraction, and classified New York Heart Association Class III/IV were at greater risk of both any degree and severe PPM. Smaller prosthesis size increased the risk of any degree of PPM, whereas postdilation and larger prostheses were protective factors. In conclusion, all-cause mortality was significantly affected in severe PPM compared with nonsevere cases, whereas this excess mortality was not observed between those with any degree of PPM and those without. Closer attention to patient and bioprosthetic valve factors is required to minimize the occurrence of severe PPM.

Comparison of biodegradable and newer generation durable polymer drug-eluting stents with short-term dual antiplatelet therapy: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized trials comprising of 43,875 patients.

Newer generation durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) and biodegradable polymer DES (BP-DES) have similar efficacy with dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration of > 6 months. However, this difference in outcomes have not been well studied in shorter DAPT regime. This study compares the safety and efficacy profiles of DP-DES and BP-DES based on short-term (1-3 months), intermediate-term (4-6 months) and standard DAPT (6-12 months) durations. A search was conducted on Embase and Medline for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing stent types, and DAPT durations. Primary endpoints include cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis, stroke, target vessel revascularization (TVR) and major bleeding. Network analysis was conducted to summarize the evidence. A total of 15 RCTs involving 43,875 patients were included. DP-DES was associated with significantly lower major bleeding rates compared to BP-DES (RR 0.44, Crl 0.22-0.83) in short-term DAPT. Among DP-DES patients, short-term DAPT was associated with lower major bleeding risk compared to standard DAPT (RR 0.47, CrI 0.32-0.69). This favorable bleeding profile with short DAPT was not found in BP-DES patients. Cardiac death, MI, definite stent thrombosis, stroke and TVR rates were similar across the various DAPT durations and stent types. Our preliminary findings demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety outcomes between BP-DES and newer generation BP-DES across various DAPT durations. In patients requiring short DAPT, DP-DES had more favourable major bleeding profile compared to BP-DES, without compromising anti-thrombotic efficacy.