Characteristics and long-term outcomes of percutaneous revascularization of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis in the United States: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry, 2004 to 2008
- PMID: 22322080
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.10.883
Characteristics and long-term outcomes of percutaneous revascularization of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis in the United States: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry, 2004 to 2008
Erratum in
- J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012 Apr 17;59(16):1493-4
Abstract
Objectives: This study sought to assess percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis in routine U.S. clinical practice.
Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention for ULMCA stenosis is controversial; however, current use and outcomes of ULMCA PCI in routine U.S. clinical practice have not been described.
Methods: We evaluated 5,627 patients undergoing ULMCA PCI at 693 centers within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Catheterization Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Registry for temporal trends in PCI use (2004 to 2008), patient characteristics, and in-hospital mortality. Thirty-month mortality and composite major adverse events (death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization) with drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents were compared using inverse probability weighted (IPW) hazard ratios (HRs) in a nonrandomized Medicare-linked (age ≥65 years) patient cohort (n = 2,765).
Results: ULMCA PCI was performed in 4.3% of patients with ULMCA stenosis. Unadjusted in-hospital mortality rates ranged from 2.9% for elective cases to 45.1% for emergent/salvage cases. By 30 months, 57.9% of the elderly ULMCA PCI population experienced death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization, and 42.7% died. Patients receiving drug-eluting stents (versus bare-metal stents) had a lower 30-month mortality (IPW HR: 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73 to 0.96), but the composite of major adverse events were similar (IPW HR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.84 to 1.06).
Conclusions: In the United States, ULMCA PCI is performed in <5% of patients with ULMCA disease and is generally reserved for those at high procedural risk. Adverse events are common in elderly patients and are related to patient and procedural characteristics, including stent type.
Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Long-term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention for ostial/mid-shaft lesions versus distal bifurcation lesions in unprotected left main coronary artery: the DELTA Registry (drug-eluting stent for left main coronary artery disease): a multicenter registry evaluating percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting for left main treatment.JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Dec;6(12):1242-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2013.08.005. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013. PMID: 24355114
-
Trends in percutaneous versus surgical revascularization of unprotected left main coronary stenosis in the drug-eluting stent era: a report from the American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry (ACC-NCDR).Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006 Dec;68(6):867-72. doi: 10.1002/ccd.20886. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2006. PMID: 17080468
-
Long-term safety and efficacy of stenting versus coronary artery bypass grafting for unprotected left main coronary artery disease: 5-year results from the MAIN-COMPARE (Revascularization for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: Comparison of Percutaneous Coronary Angioplasty Versus Surgical Revascularization) registry.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Jul 6;56(2):117-24. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.04.004. Epub 2010 May 6. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010. PMID: 20451344
-
A meta-analysis of 3,773 patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention or surgery for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis.JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009 Aug;2(8):739-47. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2009.05.020. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009. PMID: 19695542 Review.
-
Percutaneous coronary intervention versus bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomised trials.EuroIntervention. 2011 Oct 30;7(6):738-46, 1. doi: 10.4244/EIJV7I6A117. EuroIntervention. 2011. PMID: 21947626 Review.
Cited by
-
Is percutaneous coronary intervention as effective as bypass surgery in left main stem coronary artery stenosis?Herz. 2013 Mar;38(2):147-52. doi: 10.1007/s00059-012-3745-3. Herz. 2013. PMID: 23324915
-
Stenting or bypass surgery for unprotected left main coronary artery disease-still a long rally to go.J Thorac Dis. 2016 Sep;8(9):2292-2295. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2016.08.42. J Thorac Dis. 2016. PMID: 27746958 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Highlights of the year in JACC 2012.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Jan 22;61(3):357-85. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2012.12.002. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013. PMID: 23328613 Free PMC article. Review. No abstract available.
-
Revascularization for left main and multivessel coronary artery disease in the drug-eluting stent era: integration of recent drug-eluting stent trials.Curr Cardiol Rep. 2012 Aug;14(4):468-76. doi: 10.1007/s11886-012-0274-x. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2012. PMID: 22638907 Review.
-
Contemporary Use and Trends in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States: An Analysis of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Research to Practice Initiative.JAMA Cardiol. 2019 Feb 1;4(2):100-109. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2018.4376. JAMA Cardiol. 2019. PMID: 30601910 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous