| 1. |
- Mohammad, M. A., et al.
(författare)
-
Trends in Clinical Practice and Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American Heart Association. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 2047-9980. ; 11:7
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background The use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to treat unprotected left main coronary artery disease has expanded rapidly in the past decade. We aimed to describe nationwide trends in clinical practice and outcomes after PCI for left main coronary artery disease. Methods and Results Patients (n=4085) enrolled in the SCAAR (Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry) as undergoing PCI for left main coronary artery disease from 2005 to 2017 were included. A count regression model was used to analyze time-related differences in procedural characteristics. The 3-year major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event rate defined as death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeat revascularization was calculated with the Kaplan-Meier estimator and Cox proportional hazard model. The number of annual PCI procedures grew from 121 in 2005 to 589 in 2017 (389%). The increase was greater for men (479%) and individuals with diabetes (500%). Periprocedural complications occurred in 7.9%, decreasing from 10% to 6% during the study period. A major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event occurred in 35.7% of patients, falling from 45.6% to 23.9% (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.41-0.78; P=0.001). Radial artery access rose from 21.5% to 74.2% and intracoronary diagnostic procedures from 14.0% to 53.3%. Use of bare-metal stents and first-generation drug-eluting stents fell from 19.0% and 71.9%, respectively, to 0, with use of new-generation drug-eluting stents increasing to 95.2%. Conclusions Recent changes in clinical practice relating to PCI for left main coronary artery disease are characterized by a 4-fold rise in procedures conducted, increased use of evidence-based adjunctive treatment strategies, intracoronary diagnostics, newer stents, and more favorable outcomes.
|
|
| 2. |
- Escaned, Javier, et al.
(författare)
-
Safety of the Deferral of Coronary Revascularization on the Basis of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio and Fractional Flow Reserve Measurements in Stable Coronary Artery Disease and Acute Coronary Syndromes
- 2018
-
Ingår i: JACC. - : Elsevier. - 1936-8798 .- 1876-7605. ; 11:15, s. 1437-1449
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients deferred from coronary revascularization on the basis of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) or fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements in stable angina pectoris (SAP) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS). BACKGROUND Assessment of coronary stenosis severity with pressure guidewires is recommended to determine the need for myocardial revascularization. METHODS The safety of deferral of coronary revascularization in the pooled per-protocol population (n = 4,486) of the DEFINE-FLAIR (Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate Stenosis to Guide Revascularisation) and iFR-SWEDEHEART (Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Versus Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Stable Angina Pectoris or Acute Coronary Syndrome) randomized clinical trials was investigated. Patients were stratified according to revascularization decision making on the basis of iFR or FFR and to clinical presentation (SAP or ACS). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization at 1 year. RESULTS Coronary revascularization was deferred in 2,130 patients. Deferral was performed in 1,117 patients (50%) in the iFR group and 1,013 patients (45%) in the FFR group (p < 0.01). At 1 year, the MACE rate in the deferred population was similar between the iFR and FFR groups (4.12% vs. 4.05%; fully adjusted hazard ratio: 1.13; 95% confidence interval: 0.72 to 1.79; p = 0.60). A clinical presentation with ACS was associated with a higher MACE rate compared with SAP in deferred patients (5.91% vs. 3.64% in ACS and SAP, respectively; fully adjusted hazard ratio: 0.61 in favor of SAP; 95% confidence interval: 0.38 to 0.99; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS Overall, deferral of revascularization is equally safe with both iFR and FFR, with a low MACE rate of about 4%. Lesions were more frequently deferred when iFR was used to assess physiological significance. In deferred patients presenting with ACS, the event rate was significantly increased compared with SAP at 1 year. (C) 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier on behalf of the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
