Search

Background: Myocardial revascularization failure (MRF) and Secondary revascularization (SR) are contemporary interventional cardiology challenges., Aim: To investigate the characteristics, management, and prognosis of patients with myocardial revascularization failure (MRF) and need for secondary revascularization (SR) in contemporary practice., Methods: The REVASEC study is a prospective registry (NCT03349385), which recruited patients with prior revascularization referred for coronary angiography at 19 centers. The primary endpoint is a patient-oriented composite (POCE) at 1 year, including death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization., Results: A total of 869 patients previously revascularized by percutaneous intervention (83%) or surgery (17%) were recruited. MRF was found in 83.7% (41.1% stent/graft failure, 32.1% progression of coronary disease, and 10.5% residual disease). SR was performed in 70.1%, preferably by percutaneous intervention (95%). The POCE rate at 1 year was 14% in the overall cohort, with 6.4% all-cause death. In the multivariate analysis, lower POCE rates were found in the groups without MRF (9.4%) and with disease progression (11%) compared with graft/stent failure (17%) and residual disease (18%), hazard ratio 0.67 (95% confidence interval: 0.45-0.99), p = 0.043. At 1 year, the SR group had less chronic persistent angina (19% vs. 34%, p < 0.001), but a higher rate of repeat revascularization (9% vs. 2.9%, p < 0.001)., Conclusion: MRF was found in 84% of patients with prior revascularization referred for coronary angiography. Stent/graft failure and residual coronary disease were associated with a worse prognosis. SR provided better symptom control at the expense of a higher rate of new revascularization., (© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)