ABSTRACT
AIMS: There is little evidence guiding the choice between a one-stent and a two-stent approach in unprotected distal left main coronary artery disease (UDLMCAD) presenting as acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We aim to compare these two techniques in an unselected ACS group. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a single center retrospective observational study, that included all patients with UDLMCAD and ACS undergoing PCI between 2014 and 2018. Group A underwent PCI with a one-stent technique (n = 41, 58.6%), Group B with a two-stent technique (n = 29, 41.4%). A total of 70 patients were included, with a median age of 63 years, including n = 12 (17.1%) with cardiogenic shock. There were no differences between Group A and B in terms of patient characteristics, including SYNTAX score (median 23). The 30-day mortality was 15.7% overall, and was lower in Group B (3.5% vs. 24.4%, p = 0.02). Mortality rate at 4 years was significantly lower in Group B (21.4% vs. 44%), also when adjusted in a multivariable regression model (HR 0.26, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, patients with UDLMCAD and ACS undergoing PCI using a two-stent technique had lower early and midterm mortality compared to one-stent approach, even after adjusting for patient-related or angiographic factors.
ABSTRACT
Background. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCAD) have become a feasible and efficient alternative to coronary artery bypass surgery, especially in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). There are limited data regarding early and late outcomes after ULMCAD PCI in patients with ACS and stable angina.The aim of this study was to compare early and four-year clinical outcomes in patients with ULMCAD PCI presenting as ACS or stable angina in a high-volume PCI center.Methods. We conducted a single center retrospective observational study, which included 146 patients with ULMCAD undergoing PCI between 2014 and 2018. Patients were divided in two groups: Group A included patients with stable angina (n = 70, 47.9%) and Group B patients with ACS (n = 76, 52.1%).Results. 30-day mortality was 8.22% overall, lower in Group A (1.43% vs 14.47%, p = 0.02). Mortality and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rates at 4 years were significantly lower in Group A (9.64% vs 33.25%, p = 0.001, and 24.06% vs 40.11%, p = 0.012, respectively). Target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 4 year did not differ between groups (15% in Group A vs 12.76% in Group B, p = 0.5).Conclusions. In our study patients with ULMCAD and ACS undergoing PCI had higher early and long-term mortality and MACE rates compared to patients with stable angina, with similar TLR rate at 4-year follow-up.
