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.

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.

Prevalence of depression and its association with sociodemographic factors in patients with chronic pain: A cross-sectional study in a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia.

INTRODUCTION: Mental health issues, especially depression, are common in chronic pain patients. Depression affects these patients negatively and could lead to poor control of their pain. Some risk factors for both chronic pain and depression are known and need to be targeted as part of the management in a multidisciplinary approach. This study was conducted to estimate the prevalence of depression among chronic pain patients attending a pain clinic and to explore the association between depression in chronic pain patients and other factors such as sociodemographic features, number of pain sites, severity of pain, and types of pain. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional study that carried out in a chronic pain clinic in a tertiary care hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia (King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre). All chronic pain patients including cancer-related pain, apart from acute pain patients and children, were eligible to participate in the study. Association between depression and sociodemographic factors was assessed with univariate and multivariate methods. Main outcome measures were the prevalence of depression in chronic pain patients using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and the association with sociodemographic factors. RESULTS: A total of 200 chronic pain patients (128 females [64%]) participated in the study. The prevalence of depression was 71% (95% confidence interval: 64.7-77.3) based on the PHQ-9 diagnostic criteria using a cutoff point of >5. Among those patients who were depressed, 9 (4.5%) had severe depression as compared to 31 (15.5%), 41 (20.5%), and 61 (30.5%) who had moderately severe, moderate, and mild depression, respectively. Depression (scored at the cutoff point of 5) in chronic pain patients was significantly associated with age, financial status, medical history of depression, and pain severity. CONCLUSION: Depression is common among chronic pain patients with several risk factors aggravating its presentation. Due to their increased risk of depression, psychiatric counseling that offers mental health assistance should be prioritized and made available as a multidisciplinary approach for the treatment of chronic pain patients.

Socioeconomic Factors and Severity of Coronary Artery Disease in Patients Undergoing Coronary Angiography: A Multicentre Study of Arabian Gulf States.

INTRODUCTION: Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a leading cause of death worldwide. The association of socioeconomic status with CAD is supported by numerous epidemiological studies. Whether such factors also impact the number of diseased coronary vessels and its severity is not well established. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective multicentre, multi-ethnic, cross sectional observational study of consecutive patients undergoing coronary angiography (CAG) at 5 hospitals in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Baseline demographics, socioeconomic, and clinical variables were collected for all patients. Significant CAD was defined as ≥70% luminal stenosis in a major epicardial vessel. Left main disease (LMD) was defined as ≥50% stenosis in the left main coronary artery. Multi-vessel disease (MVD) was defined as having >1 significant CAD. RESULTS: Of 1,068 patients (age 59 ± 13, female 28%, diabetes 56%, hypertension 60%, history of CAD 43%), 792 (74%) were from urban and remainder (26%) from rural communities. Patients from rural centres were older (61 ± 12 vs 58 ± 13), and more likely to have a history of diabetes (63 vs 54%), hypertension (74 vs 55%), dyslipidaemia (78 vs 59%), CAD (50 vs 41%) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (27 vs 21%). The two groups differed significantly in terms of income level, employment status and indication for angiography. After adjusting for baseline differences, patients living in a rural area were more likely to have significant CAD (adjusted OR 2.40 [1.47, 3.97]), MVD (adjusted OR 1.76 [1.18, 2.63]) and LMD (adjusted OR 1.71 [1.04, 2.82]). Higher income was also associated with a higher risk for significant CAD (adjusted OR 6.97 [2.30, 21.09]) and MVD (adjusted OR 2.49 [1.11, 5.56]), while unemployment was associated with a higher risk of significant CAD (adjusted OR 2.21, [1.27, 3.85]). CONCLUSION: Communal and socioeconomic factors are associated with higher odds of significant CAD and MVD in the group of patients referred for CAG. The underpinnings of these associations (e.g. pathophysiologic factors, access to care, and system-wide determinants of quality) require further study.

Widowhood and severity of coronary artery disease: a multicenter study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the association of widowhood with the severity and extent of coronary artery disease (CAD), and whether it is modified by sex or socioeconomic status. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 1068 patients undergoing coronary angiography at five centers in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates were included in the study. CAD was defined as more than 70% lumen stenosis in a major epicardial vessel or more than 50% in the left main coronary artery. Multivessel disease was defined as more than one diseased vessel. RESULTS: Of 1068 patients, 65 (6%) were widowed. Widowed patients were older (65±15 vs. 59±12), more likely to be female (75 vs. 25%), less likely to be smokers (18 vs. 47%), of lower economic and education status, and more likely to have undergone coronary angiography for urgent/emergent indications (75 vs. 61%) (P<0.05 for all). There was a significant association between widowhood and the number of coronary arteries with more than 70% lumen stenosis. Consequently, such a high degree of lumen stenosis in those who were widowed was more likely to require coronary artery bypass graft surgery (38 vs. 16%; P<0.01). After adjusting for baseline differences, widowhood was associated with a significantly higher odds of CAD [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 3.6; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.2-10.5] and multivessel disease (adjusted OR 4.6; 95% CI 2.2-9.6), but not left main disease (adjusted OR 1.3; 95% CI 0.5-3.1). All associations were consistent in men and women and not modified by age, community setting (urban vs. rural), employment, income, or educational levels (Pinteraction>0.1 for all). CONCLUSION: Widowhood is associated with the severity and extent of CAD. The association is not modified by sex or socioeconomic status.