Impact of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction on Procedural and Long-Term Outcomes of Bifurcation Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

The association of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) with procedural and long-term outcomes after state-of-the-art percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of bifurcation lesions remains unsettled. A total of 5,333 patients who underwent contemporary coronary bifurcation PCI were included in the intercontinental retrospective combined insights from the unified RAIN (veRy thin stents for patients with left mAIn or bifurcatioN in real life) and COBIS (COronary BIfurcation Stenting) III bifurcation registries. Of 5,003 patients (93.8%) with known baseline LVEF, 244 (4.9%) had LVEF <40% (bifurcation with reduced ejection fraction [BIFrEF] group), 430 (8.6%) had LVEF 40% to 49% (bifurcation with mildly reduced ejection fraction [BIFmEF] group) and 4,329 (86.5%) had ejection fraction (EF) ≥50% (bifurcation with preserved ejection fraction [BIFpEF] group). The primary end point was the Kaplan-Meier estimate of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) (a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization). Patients with BIFrEF had a more complex clinical profile and coronary anatomy. No difference in procedural (30 days) MACE was observed across EF categories, also after adjustment for in-study outcome predictors (BIFrEF vs BIFmEF: adjusted hazard ratio [adj-HR] 1.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37 to 5.21, p = 0.626; BIFrEF vs BIFpEF: adj-HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.87, p = 0.883; BIFmEF vs BIFpEF: adj-HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.29 to 2.27, p = 0.683). BIFrEF was independently associated with long-term MACE (median follow-up 21 months, interquartile range 10 to 21 months) than both BIFmEF (adj-HR 2.20, 95% CI 1.41 to 3.41, p <0.001) and BIFpEF (adj-HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.41 to 2.60, p <0.001) groups, although no difference was observed between BIFmEF and BIFpEF groups (adj-HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.24, p = 0.449). In conclusion, in patients who underwent PCI of a coronary bifurcation lesion according to contemporary clinical practice, reduced LVEF (<40%), although a strong predictor of long-term MACEs, does not affect procedural outcomes.

Percutaneous vs. surgical revascularization for patients with unprotected left main stenosis: a meta-analysis of 5-year follow-up randomized controlled trials.

AIMS: A 5-year survival of patients with unprotected left main (ULM) stenosis according to the choice of revascularization (percutaneous vs. surgical) remains to be defined. METHODS AND RESULTS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) with a follow-up of at least 5 years were included. All-cause death was the primary endpoint. MACCE [a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and repeat revascularization] along with its single components and cardiovascular (CV) death were the secondary ones. Analyses were stratified according to the use of first- vs. last-generation coronary stents. Subgroup comparisons were performed according to SYNTAX score (below or above 33) and to age (using cut-offs of each trial's subgroup analysis). Four RCTs with 4394 patients were identified: 2197 were treated with CABG, 657 with first generation, and 1540 with last-generation stents. At 5-year rates of all-cause death did not differ [odds ratio (OR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-1.21], as those of CV death and stroke. Coronary artery bypass graft reduced rates of MACCE (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60-0.79), mainly driven by MI (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.36-0.65) and revascularization (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.45-0.64). Benefit of CABG for MACCE was consistent, although with different extent, across values of SYNTAX score (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.59-0.97 for values < 32 and OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.47-0.84 for values ≥ 33) while was not evident for 'younger' patients (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.65-1.07 vs. OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51-0.84 for 'older' patients). CONCLUSION: For patients with ULM disease followed-up for 5 years, no significant difference was observed in all-cause and cardiovascular death between PCI and CABG. Coronary artery bypass graft reduced risk of MI, revascularization, and MACCE especially in older patients and in those with complex coronary disease and a high SYNTAX score.