Objectives: We undertook a meta-analysis to assess outcomes for drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare-metal stents (BMS) in percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis.
Background: Uncertainty exists regarding the relative performance of DES versus BMS in percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main coronary stenosis.
Methods: Of a total of 838 studies, 44 met inclusion criteria (n = 10,342). The co-primary end points were mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel/lesion revascularization (TVR/TLR), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE: mortality, MI, TVR/TLR).
Results: Event rates for DES and BMS were calculated at 6 to 12 months, at 2 years, and at 3 years. Crude event rates at 3 years were mortality (8.8% and 12.7%), MI (4.0% and 3.4%), TVR/TLR (8.0% and 16.4%), and MACE (21.4% and 31.6%). Nine studies were included in a comparative analysis (n = 5,081). At 6 to 12 months the adjusted odds ratio (OR) for DES versus BMS were: mortality 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.06 to 15.48; p = 0.97), MI 0.64 (95% CI: 0.19 to 2.17; p = 0.47), TVR/TLR 0.10 (95% CI: 0.01 to 0.84; p = 0.01), and MACE 0.34 (95% CI: 0.15 to 0.78; p = 0.01). At 2 years, the OR for DES versus BMS were: mortality 0.42 (95% CI: 0.28 to 0.62; p < 0.01), MI 0.16 (95% CI: 0.01 to 3.53; p = 0.13), and MACE 0.31 (95% CI: 0.15 to 0.66; p < 0.01). At 3 years, the OR for DES versus BMS were: mortality 0.70 (95% CI: 0.53 to 0.92; p = 0.01), MI 0.49 (95% CI: 0.26 to 0.92; p = 0.03), TVR/TLR 0.46 (95% CI: 0.30 to 0.69; p < 0.01), and MACE 0.78 (95% CI: 0.57 to 1.07; p = 0.12).
Conclusions: Our meta-analysis suggests that DES is associated with favorable outcomes for mortality, MI, TVR/TLR, and MACE as compared to BMS in percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3072800 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2010.03.019 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Impella versus Non-Impella for Non-emergent High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Impella vs. Non-Impella for HR-PCI.
Am J Cardiol
January 2025
Section of Interventional Cardiology, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC, USA. Electronic address:
Background: The benefit of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) with Impella (Abiomed, Inc, Danvers, MA) for patients undergoing non-emergent, high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HR-PCI) is unclear and currently the subject of a large randomized clinical trial (RCT), PROTECT IV. While contemporary registry data from PROTECT III demonstrated improvement of outcomes with Impella when compared with historical data (PROTECT II), there is lack of direct comparison to the HR-PCI cohort that did not receive Impella support.
Methods: We retrospectively identified patients from our institution meeting PROTECT III inclusion criteria (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] <35% with unprotected left main or last remaining vessel or LVEF <30% undergoing multivessel PCI), and compared this group (NonIMP) to the published outcomes data from the PROTECT III registry (IMP).
Drug-Coated Balloon-Based Treatment of Left Main True Bifurcation Lesion.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv
January 2025
Department of Internal Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Gangnam-gu, South Korea.
Background: There is a paucity of data regarding drug-coated balloon (DCB) treatment in the context of left main (LM) true bifurcation lesions.
Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DCB-based treatment for unprotected LM true bifurcation lesions.
Methods: A total of 39 patients with LM true bifurcation lesion (Medina: 1,1,1/0,1,1/1,0,1) who were successfully treated with DCB alone or in combination with drug-eluting stent (DES) were retrospectively enrolled into the DCB-based group.
Modified Medina Trifurcation Score: a new tool to predict outcomes of unprotected distal left main trifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention.
Minerva Cardiol Angiol
January 2024
Unit of Hospital Cardiology, IRCCS Galeazzi Sant'Ambrogio Hospital, Milan, Italy -
Unprotected distal left main percutaneous intervention.
Prog Cardiovasc Dis
December 2024
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22908, United States of America. Electronic address:
Revascularization has been demonstrated to be clearly superior to medical therapy for significant unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) has a class 1 indication in both the American and European society guidelines for the treatment of LMCA disease. However, for the population of patients who are declined CABG after a heart team evaluation, percutaneous coronary interventional (PCI) may be an efficacious alternative.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFLong-term Follow-up Optical Coherence Tomography Assessment of Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Unprotected Left Main.
Rev Cardiovasc Med
December 2024
Department of Cardiology, University Clinical Center of Serbia, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia.
Background: Elective unprotected left main (ULM) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has long-term mortality rates comparable to surgical revascularization, thanks to advances in drug-eluting stent (DES) design, improved PCI techniques, and frequent use of intravascular imaging. However, urgent PCI of ULM culprit lesions remains associated with high in-hospital mortality and unfavourable long-term outcomes, including DES restenosis and stent thrombosis (ST). This analysis aimed to examine the long-term outcomes and healing of DES implanted in ULM during primary PCI using high-resolution optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!