One-year clinical outcomes after left main coronary artery intervention at Nhan dan Gia Dinh hospital
Main Article Content
Abstract
Left main coronary artery disease is uncommon but associated with mortality; alongside coronary artery bypass grafting, percutaneous coronary intervention is increasingly used. This retrospective study of 151 patients undergoing left main intervention evaluated clinical and procedural characteristics and one-year outcomes. Mean age was 64.4 ± 11.1 years; more than 80% presented with acute coronary syndrome, 9.9% with cardiogenic shock, mean GRACE score was 158, and mean ejection fraction was 49%. Distal lesions accounted for 50.3%, calcification 16.6%, and most patients had multivessel disease; a provisional strategy predominated. Procedural success was 92.1% and complications 4.6%. At one year, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) occurred in 7.3% and cumulative mortality was 6.6%. Predictors of events included heart rate, Killip class, admission for myocardial infarction, ejection fraction, GRACE score, intra-aortic balloon pump use, and proximal optimization technique. Conclusion: Left main percutaneous coronary intervention achieved a high success rate and favorable one-year outcomes; severe clinical status at admission was clearly associated with outcomes in exploratory analysis.
Article Details
Keywords
Percutaneous coronary intervention, left main coronary artery, acute coronary syndrome, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events
References
2. Thuijs D, Kappetein AP, Serruys PW, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial. Lancet. 2019; 394(10206): 1325-1334. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31997-X.
3. Stone GW, Kappetein AP, Sabik JF, et al. Five-year outcomes after PCI or CABG for left main coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2019; 381(19): 1820-1830. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1909406.
4. Holm NR, Makikallio T, Lindsay MM, et al. Percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass grafting in the treatment of unprotected left main stenosis: updated 5-year outcomes from the randomised, non-inferiority NOBLE trial. Lancet. 2020; 395(10219): 191-199. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32972-1.
5. Lawton JS, Tamis-Holland JE, Bangalore S, et al. 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI guideline for coronary artery revascularization: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2022; 145(3): e18-e114. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000001038.
6. Kappetein AP, Serruys PW, Sabik JF, et al. Design and rationale for a randomised comparison of everolimus-eluting stents and coronary artery bypass graft surgery in selected patients with left main coronary artery disease: the EXCEL trial. EuroIntervention. 2016; 12(7): 861-872. doi:10.4244/EIJV12I7A141.
7. Kumar NP, Roy S, Rajendran M, Shafeeq A. Percutaneous coronary intervention in unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: mid-term outcomes of a single-center observational study. Indian Heart J. 2022; 74(2): 96-104. doi:10.1016/j.ihj.2021.12.014.
8. Chen SL. DEFINITION criteria for left main bifurcation stenting-from clinical need to a formula. AsiaIntervention. 2023; 9(1): 20-24. doi:10.4244/AIJ-D-22-00072.
9. Garcia-Garcia HM, McFadden EP, Farb A, et al. Standardized end point definitions for coronary intervention trials: the Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document. Circulation. 2018; 137(24): 2635-2650. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.029289.
10. Rahman MN, Hussain B, Artani A. Outcomes of left main percutaneous coronary intervention. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2019; 29(6): 498-501. doi:10.29271/jcpsp.2019.06.498.
11. Stone GW, Sabik JF, Serruys PW, et al. Everolimus-eluting stents or bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2016; 375(23): 2223-2235. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1610227.
12. Ahn JM, Roh JH, Kim YH, et al. Randomized trial of stents versus bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease: 5-year outcomes of the PRECOMBAT study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015; 65(20): 2198-2206. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2015.03.033.
13. Sabatine MS, Bergmark BA, Murphy SA, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting in left main coronary artery disease: an individual patient data meta-analysis. Lancet. 2021; 398(10318): 2247-2257. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02334-5.
14. Zhang JJ, Ye F, Xu K, et al. Multicentre, randomized comparison of two-stent and provisional stenting techniques in patients with complex coronary bifurcation lesions: the DEFINITION II trial. Eur Heart J. 2020; 41(27): 2523-2536. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa543.
15. Hildick-Smith D, Egred M, Banning A, et al. The European Bifurcation Club Left Main Coronary Stent study: a randomized comparison of stepwise provisional vs. systematic dual stenting strategies (EBC MAIN). Eur Heart J. 2021; 42(37): 3829-3839. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehab283.