Percutaneous coronary intervention vs. coronary artery bypass grafting in emergency and non-emergency unprotected left-main revascularization.

BACKGROUND: The optimal revascularization strategy in patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease in the emergency setting is still controversial. Thus, we aimed to compare the outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with and without emergent LMCA disease. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 2138 patients recruited from 14 centers between 2015 and 2019. We compared patients with emergent LMCA revascularization who underwent PCI (n = 264) to patients who underwent CABG (n = 196) and patients with non-emergent LMCA revascularization with PCI (n = 958) to those who underwent CABG (n = 720). The study outcomes were in-hospital and follow-up all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). RESULTS: Emergency PCI patients were older and had a significantly higher prevalence of chronic kidney disease, lower ejection fraction, and higher EuroSCORE than CABG patients. CABG patients had significantly higher SYNTAX scores, multivessel disease, and ostial lesions. In patients presenting with arrest, PCI had significantly lower MACCE (P = 0.017) and in-hospital mortality (P = 0.016) than CABG. In non-emergent revascularization, PCI was associated with lower MACCE in patients with low (P = 0.015) and intermediate (P < 0.001) EuroSCORE. PCI was associated with lower MACCE in patients with low (P = 0.002) and intermediate (P = 0.008) SYNTAX scores. In non-emergent revascularization, PCI was associated with reduced hospital mortality in patients with intermediate (P = 0.001) and high (P = 0.002) EuroSCORE compared to CABG. PCI was associated with lower hospital mortality in patients with low (P = 0.031) and intermediate (P = 0.001) SYNTAX scores. At a median follow-up time of 20 months (IQR: 10-37), emergency PCI had lower MACCE compared to CABG [HR: 0.30 (95% CI 0.14-0.66), P < 0.003], with no significant difference in all-cause mortality between emergency PCI and CABG [HR: 1.18 (95% CI 0.23-6.08), P = 0.845]. CONCLUSIONS: PCI could be advantageous over CABG in revascularizing LMCA disease in emergencies. PCI could be preferred for revascularization of non-emergent LMCA in patients with intermediate EuroSCORE and low and intermediate SYNTAX scores.

Left Main Coronary Artery Revascularization in Patients with Impaired Renal Function: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting.

INTRODUCTION: The evidence about the optimal revascularization strategy in patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease and impaired renal function is limited. Thus, we aimed to compare the outcomes of LMCA disease revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI] vs. coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]) in patients with and without impaired renal function. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 2,138 patients recruited from 14 centers between 2015 and 2,019. We compared patients with impaired renal function who had PCI (n= 316) to those who had CABG (n = 121) and compared patients with normal renal function who had PCI (n = 906) to those who had CABG (n = 795). The study outcomes were in-hospital and follow-up major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). RESULTS: Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the risk of in-hospital MACCE was significantly higher in CABG compared to PCI in patients with impaired renal function (odds ratio [OR]: 8.13 [95% CI: 4.19-15.76], p < 0.001) and normal renal function (OR: 2.59 [95% CI: 1.79-3.73]; p < 0.001). There were no differences in follow-up MACCE between CABG and PCI in patients with impaired renal function (HR: 1.14 [95% CI: 0.71-1.81], p = 0.585) and normal renal function (HR: 1.12 [0.90-1.39], p = 0.312). CONCLUSIONS: PCI could have an advantage over CABG in revascularization of LMCA disease in patients with impaired renal function regarding in-hospital MACCE. The follow-up MACCE was comparable between PCI and CABG in patients with impaired and normal renal function.

Outcomes of Left Main Revascularization in Patients with Anemia: Gulf Left Main Registry.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of baseline anemia and anemia following revascularization on outcomes in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. METHODS: This was a retrospective, multicenter, observational study conducted between January 2015 and December 2019. The data on patients with ULMCA who underwent revascularization through percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) were stratified by the hemoglobin level at baseline into anemic and non-anemic groups to compare in-hospital events. The pre-discharge hemoglobin following revascularization was categorized into very low (<80 g/L for men and women), low (≥80 and ≤119 g/L for women and ≤129 g/L for men), and normal (≥130 g/L for men and ≥120 g/L for women) to assess impact on follow-up outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 2,138 patients were included, 796 (37.2%) of whom had anemia at baseline. A total of 319 developed anemia after revascularization and moved from being non-anemic at baseline to anemic at discharge. There was no difference in hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) and mortality between CABG and PCI in anemic patients. At a median follow-up time of 20 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 27), patients with pre-discharge anemia who underwent PCI had a higher incidence of congestive heart failure (CHF) (p < 0.0001), and those who underwent CABG had significantly higher follow-up mortality (HR: 9.85 (95% CI: 2.53-38.43), p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this Gulf LM study, baseline anemia had no impact upon in-hospital MACCE and total mortality following revascularization (PCI or CABG). However, pre-discharge anemia is associated with worse outcomes after ULMCA disease revascularization, with significantly higher all-cause mortality in patients who had CABG, and a higher incidence of CHF in PCI patients, at a median follow-up time of 20 months (IQR: 27).

Impact of left ventricular ejection fraction on outcomes after left main revascularization: g-LM Registry.

AIMS: The impact of left ventricular dysfunction on clinical outcomes following revascularization is not well established in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCA). In this study, we evaluated the impact of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on clinical outcomes of patients with ULMCA requiring revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG). METHODS: The details of the design, methods, end points, and relevant definitions are outlined in the Gulf Left Main Registry: a retrospective, observational study conducted between January 2015 and December 2019 across 14 centres in 3 Gulf countries. In this study, the data on patients with ULMCA who underwent revascularization through PCI or CABG were stratified by LVEF into three main subgroups; low (l-LVEF <40%), mid-range (m-LVEF 40-49%), and preserved (p-LVEF ≥50%). Primary outcomes were hospital major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and mortality and follow-up MACCE and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 2137 patients were included; 1221 underwent PCI and 916 had CABG. During hospitalization, MACCE was significantly higher in patients with l-LVEF [(10.10%), P = 0.005] and m-LVEF [(10.80%), P = 0.009], whereas total mortality was higher in patients with m-LVEF [(7.40%), P = 0.009] and p-LVEF [(7.10%), P = 0.045] who underwent CABG. There was no mortality difference between groups in patients with l-LVEF. At a median follow-up of 15 months, there was no difference in MACCE and total mortality between patients who underwent CABG or PCI with p-LVEF and m-LVEF. CONCLUSION: CABG was associated with higher in-hospital events. Hospital mortality in patients with l-LVEF was comparable between CABG and PCI. At 15 months' follow-up, PCI could have an advantage in decreasing MACCE in patients with l-LVEF.

Outcomes of Myocardial Revascularization in Diabetic Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: A Multicenter Observational Study From Three Gulf Countries.

BACKGROUND: Real-world data for managing patients with diabetes and left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease are scarce. We compared percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) outcomes versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in diabetes and LMCA disease patients. METHODS: We retrospectively studied patients with LMCA presented to 14 centers from 2015 to 2019. The study included 2138 patients with unprotected LMCA disease; 1468 (68.7 %) had diabetes. Patients were grouped into; diabetes with PCI (n = 804) or CABG (n = 664) and non-diabetes with PCI (n = 418) or CABG (n = 252). RESULTS: In diabetes, cardiac (34 (5.1 %) vs. 22 (2.7 %); P = 0.016), non-cardiac (13 (2 %) vs. 6 (0.7 %); P = 0.027) and total hospital mortality (47 (7.1 %) vs. 28 (3.5 %); P = 0.0019), myocardial infarction (45 (6.8 %) vs. 11 (1.4 %); P = 0.001), cerebrovascular events (25 (3.8 %) vs. 12 (1.5 %); P = 0.005) and minor bleeding (65 (9.8 %) vs. 50 (6.2 %); P = 0.006) were significantly higher in CABG patients compared to PCI; respectively. The median follow-up time was 20 (10-37) months. In diabetes, total mortality was higher in CABG (P = 0.001) while congestive heart failure was higher in PCI (P = 0.001). There were no differences in major adverse cerebrovascular events and target lesion revascularization between PCI and CABG. Predictors of mortality in diabetes were high anatomical SYNTAX, peripheral arterial disease, chronic kidney disease, and cardiogenic shock. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter retrospective study, we found no significant difference in clinical outcomes during the short-term follow-up between PCI with second-generation DES and CABG except for lower total mortality and a higher rate of congestive heart failure in PCI group of patients. Randomized trials to characterize patients who could benefit from each treatment option are needed.

One Versus Two Stents Strategies for Unprotected Left Main Intervention: Gulf Left Main Registry.

The optimal stenting strategy for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease remains debated. This retrospective observational study (Gulf Left Main Registry) analyzed the outcomes of 1 vs 2 stents in patients with unprotected left main percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Overall, 1222 patients were evaluated; 173 had 1 stent and 1049 had 2 stents. The 2-stent group was older with more comorbidities, higher mean SYNTAX scores, and more distal bifurcation lesions. In the 1-stent group, in-hospital events were significant for major bleeding, and better mean creatinine clearance. At median follow-up of 20 months, the 1-stent group was more likely to have target lesion revascularization (TLR). Total mortality was numerically lower in the 1-stent group (.00% vs 2.10%); however, this was not statistically significant (P=.068). Our analysis demonstrates the benefits of a 2-stent approach for ULMCA patients with high SYNTAX scores and lesions in both major side branches, while the potential benefit of a 1-stent approach for less complex ULMCA was also observed. Further studies with longer follow-up are needed to definitively demonstrate the optimal approach.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Vs Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Disease: G-LM Registry.

Coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) has been the standard of care for revascularization for patients with obstructive unprotected left main coronary disease (ULMCA). There have been multiple randomized and registry data demonstrating the technical and clinical efficacy of PCI in certain patients with ULMCA. The purpose of this study is to evaluate clinical outcomes of ULMCA PCI as compared to CABG in patients requiring revascularization in three Gulf countries. All ULMCA cases treated by PCI with DES versus CABG were retrospectively identified from 14 centers in 3 Arab Gulf countries (KSA, UAE, and Bahrain) from January 2015 to December 2019. In total, 2138 patients were included: 1222 were treated with PCI versus 916 with CABG. Patients undergoing PCI were older, and had higher comorbidities and mean European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE). Aborted cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock were reported more in the PCI group at hospital presentation. In addition, lower ejection fractions were reported in the PCI group. In hospital mortality and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) occurred more in patients undergoing CABG than PCI. At median follow-up of 15 months (interquartile range, 30), no difference was observed in freedom from revascularization, MACCE, or total mortality between those treated with PCI and CABG. While findings are similar to Western data registries, continued follow-up will be needed to ascertain whether this pattern continues into latter years.

STEMI and COVID-19 Pandemic in Saudi Arabia.

The COVID-19 pandemic had significant impact on health care worldwide which has led to a reduction in all elective admissions and management of patients through virtual care. The purpose of this study is to assess changes in STEMI volumes, door to reperfusion, and the time from the onset of symptoms until reperfusion therapy, and in-hospital events between the pre-COVID-19 (PC) and after COVID-19 (AC) period. All acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) cases were retrospectively identified from 16 centers in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia during the COVID-19 period from January 01 to April 30, 2020. These cases were compared to a pre-COVID period from January 01 to April 30, 2018 and 2019. One thousand seven hundred and eighty-five patients with a mean age 56.3 (SD ± 12.4) years, 88.3% were male. During COVID-19 Pandemic the total STEMI volumes was reduced (28%, n = 500), STEMI volumes for those treated with reperfusion therapy was reduced too (27.6%, n= 450). Door to balloon time < 90 minutes was achieved in (73.1%, no = 307) during 2020. Timing from the onset of symptoms to the balloon of more than 12 hours was higher during 2020 comparing to pre-COVID 19 years (17.2% vs <3%, respectively). There were no differences between the AC and PC period with respect to in-hospital events and the length of hospital stay. There was a reduction in the STEMI volumes during 2020. Our data reflected the standard of care for STEMI patients continued during the COVID-19 pandemic while demonstrating patients delayed presenting to the hospital.

The Prognostic Impact of Pulse Pressure in Acute Heart Failure: Insights from the HEARTS Registry.

BACKGROUND: Low pulse pressure predicts long-term mortality in chronic heart failure, but its prognostic value in acute heart failure is less understood. The present study was designed to examine the prognostic value of pulse pressure in acute heart failure. METHODS: Pulse pressure was tested for its impact on short- and long-term mortality in all patients admitted with acute heart failure from October 2009 to December 2010 in eighteen tertiary centers in Saudi Arabia (n = 2609). All comparisons were based on the median value (50 mmHg). Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction was defined as less than 40%. RESULTS: Low pulse pressure was associated with increased short-term mortality in the overall population (OR = 1.61; 95 CI 1.17, 2.22; P 0.004 and OR = 1.51; 95% CI 1.13, 2.01; P = 0.005, for hospital and thirty-day mortality, respectively), and short-term and two-year mortality in the reduced ejection fraction group (OR = 1.81; 95% CI 1.19, 2.74; P = 0.005, OR = 1.69; 95% CI 1.17, 2.45; P = 0.006, and OR = 1.29; 95% CI 1.02, 1.61; P = 0.030 for hospital, thirty-day, and two-year mortality, respectively). This effect remained after adjustment for relevant clinical variables; however, pulse pressure lost its predictive power both for short-term and long-term mortality after the incorporation of systolic blood pressure in the model. Conversely, low pulse pressure was an independent predictor of improved survival at two and three years in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (OR = 0.43; 95% CI 0.24, 0.78, P = 0.005 and OR = 0.49; 95% CI 0.28, 0.88; P = 0.016, respectively). CONCLUSION: In acute heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, the prognostic value of low pulse pressure was dependent on systolic blood pressure. However, it inversely correlated with long-term survival in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

The prognostic impact of hyperglycemia on clinical outcomes of acute heart failure: Insights from the heart function assessment registry trial in Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic impact of hyperglycemia (HG) in acute heart failure (AHF) is controversial. Our aim is to examine the impact of HG on short- and long-term survival in AHF patients. METHODS: Data from the Heart Function Assessment Registry Trial in Saudi Arabia (HEARTS) for patients who had available random blood sugar (RBS) were analyzed. The enrollment period was from October 2009 to December 2010. Comparisons were performed according to the RBS levels on admission as either <11.1 mmol/L or ≥11.1 mmol/L. Primary outcomes were hospital adverse events and short- and long-term mortality rates. RESULTS: A total of 2511 patients were analyzed. Of those, 728 (29%) had HG. Compared to non-HG patients, hyperglycemics had higher rates of hospital, 30-day, and 1-year mortality rates (8.8% vs. 5.6%; p = 0.003, 10.4% vs. 7.2%; p = 0.007, and 21.8% vs. 18.4%; p = 0.04, respectively). There were no differences between the two groups in 2- or 3-year mortality rates. After adjustment for relevant confounders, HG remained an independent predictor for hospital and 30-day mortality [odds ratio (OR) = 1.6; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-2.42; p = 0.021, and OR = 1.55; 95% CI 1.07-2.25; p = 0.02, respectively]. CONCLUSION: HG on admission is independently associated with hospital and short-term mortality in AHF patients. Future research should focus on examining the impact of tight glycemic control on outcomes of AHF patients.

Psychiatric traits in patients with vasovagal and unexplained syncope.

PURPOSE: Syncope is a common condition affecting almost one-third of the general population. The present study measures the prevalence of psychiatric traits in patients presenting with syncope (unexplained and vasovagal) and whether recurrent attacks have an impact on psychiatric profiles. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a case-control study in a tertiary hospital enrolling all patients aged ≥12 years with single or recurrent syncopal attacks. A self-reporting psychometric questionnaire (The Symptoms Checklist-90-Revised) was used to screen for depression, anxiety, somatization disorder, and phobia. Crude comparisons of average scores were done. Further, multiple logistic regression analyses were carried out to measure the impact of syncope on each psychiatric domain. The control group were matched for age, gender, and chronic illnesses with a ratio of 1:3. RESULTS: There were 43 cases and 129 control subjects, with predominance of females (67.4%) and an average age of 33.8 years (standard deviation = 16). There were no significant differences in average scores of depression (13 vs 14.53, P = 0.31), anxiety (11.3 vs 10.4, P = 0.51), or phobia (5.4 vs 5.2, P = 0.88). However, the syncope group had a higher average score for somatization disorder (18.53 vs 13.66, P = 0.002). Binary logistic regression model showed that the association between syncope and somatization disorder was independent of competing confounders (odds ratio = 3.75, 95% confidence interval: 1.72, 8.15, P = 0.001). A sub-analysis of the case group showed that patients with multiple syncopal attacks (six or more) had higher average scores of depression, anxiety, phobia, and somatization disorder compared to those who had less than six attacks. CONCLUSION: Syncope was independently associated with somatization disorder traits. Further, recurrent syncope resulted in greater deterioration of patients' psychiatric profiles. Thus, taking into account the psychiatric status in the management of such patients is crucial.

Pure Autonomic Failure with Asymptomatic Hypertensive Urgency: A Case Report and Literature Review.

We report the case study of a 70-year-old gentleman who presented with isolated, slowly progressive dizziness after prolonged standing and was eventually diagnosed with pure autonomic failure. Initially, his symptoms improved with the use of midodrine and fludrocortisone, but gradually became refractory and disabling. Despite multiple therapeutic interventions, his symptoms persisted along with worsening supine hypertension. We discuss the challenges faced in the treatment of an uncommon condition and discuss the clinical utility of performing serial 24-h ambulatory monitoring to detect subclinical blood pressure fluctuations.