Search

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the ability to predict cardiac mortality of the Global Risk Classification (GRC) and the Clinical SYNTAX (Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery) score (CSS) in left main (LM) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)., Background: There is a renewed interest in combining clinical and angiographic information to define the risk of patients undergoing LM revascularization., Methods: The GRC and CSS were assessed in patients undergoing LM PCI (n = 400) or CABG (n = 549). Stand-alone clinical (ACEF [age, creatinine, ejection fraction]), EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) and angiographic (SYNTAX score) risk scores were also investigated., Results: The GRC (Hosmer-Lemeshow statistic 0.357, p = 0.550; area under the curve 0.743) and the ACEF (Hosmer-Lemeshow 0.426, p = 0.514; area under the curve 0.741) showed the most balanced predictive characteristics in the PCI and CABG cohorts, respectively. In PCI patients, the CSS used fewer data to achieve similar discrimination but poorer calibration than the GRC. Propensity-adjusted outcomes were comparable between PCI and CABG patients with low, intermediate, or high EuroSCORE, ACEF, GRC, and CSS and those with low or intermediate SYNTAX score. Conversely, in the group with the highest SYNTAX score, the risk of cardiac mortality was significantly higher in PCI patients (hazard ratio: 2.323, 95% confidence interval: 1.091 to 4.945, p = 0.029)., Conclusions: In LM patients undergoing PCI, combined scores improve the discrimination accuracy of clinical or angiographic stand-alone tools. In LM patients undergoing CABG, the ACEF score has the best prognostic accuracy compared with other stand-alone or combined scores. The good predictive ability for PCI along with the poor predictive ability for CABG make the SYNTAX score the preferable decision-making tool in LM disease., (Copyright © 2011 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Several studies have produced estimates of the outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the field of left main (LM) coronary artery disease, but no research has been found that surveyed the issue of a comprehensive knowledge of LM anatomy and assessed the impact of different anatomic phenotypes on the likelihood of developing complications after LM PCI. We sought to develop a specific investigation on the basis of the regional anatomy and quantitative analysis of a large series of angiograms performed in our institution. We reviewed the baseline selective digital coronary angiographic examinations of 1,000 patients who did not undergo LM PCI and 296 patients with significant LM stenosis who did undergo PCI. All patients in both groups underwent a comprehensive qualitative and quantitative assessment of LM anatomical features according to several parameters. Hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) was used to identify different anatomic phenotypes of the LM coronary artery. Three different anatomical patterns were identified by HCA. The proportion of patients with LM disease increased across clusters (19% in cluster 1, 27% in cluster 2 and 44% in cluster 3, p < 0.001). No differences were observed in terms of 18-month major adverse cardiac event-free survival among patients with LM disease undergoing PCI stratified by clusters (log rank p = 0.77). In conclusion, LM phenotypes can be identified that are more likely to present with atherosclerotic disease and significant stenosis.

Due to safety concerns in recent years, much effort has been devoted to improving the outcomes associated with drug-eluting stents (DESs). This review summarizes the current status of methodological and technical achievements reported in second-generation DES. Novel stents are described based on the component (the platform, the polymer, and the drug) that has undergone the most significant changes compared to earlier generation DES. An overview of the currently available evidence on the use of novel coronary devices in patients undergoing coronary revascularization is also reviewed.