Department of Cardiology Hillel Yaffe Medical Center Hadera Israel.
The Rappaport Faculty of Medicine Technion-Israel Institute of Technology Haifa Israel.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2019 Dec 3;8(23):e013786. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.119.013786. Epub 2019 Nov 30.
Background Guidelines recommend heart team discussion and coronary artery bypass graft consideration in patients with proximal left anterior descending (LAD) artery stenosis. Evidence suggests that outcomes of proximal LAD angioplasty might not differ from treatment of nonproximal LAD locations. We aim to determine clinical outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the proximal LAD segment in comparison with nonproximal LAD angioplasty, using a thin-strut drug-eluting stent. Methods and Results In this analysis of the e-Ultimaster registry, patients undergoing angioplasty in the proximal LAD territory were compared with those treated in nonproximal LAD locations. Multivariate analysis and propensity score were used to adjust for differences among the groups. The primary outcome was target lesion failure: a composite of cardiac death, target-lesion-related myocardial infarction, and/or clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up. Of the 17 805 patients (mean age, 64.2±11; 76% male), 5452 (30.6%) underwent proximal LAD and 12 353 (69.4%) nonproximal LAD percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients in the proximal LAD group had more multivessel disease (48.7% versus 43.5%; <0.001) and 2-fold more bifurcations lesions (18.8% versus 9.2%; <0.0001). After propensity-weighted adjustment, target lesion failure did not differ between the groups (3.3% versus 2.9%; =0.17 for proximal LAD versus nonproximal LAD angioplasty, respectively). In multivariate analysis, proximal LAD treatment was not an independent predictor of target lesion failure (odds ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.88-1.31; =0.48). Conclusions At 1-year follow-up, patients had similar clinical outcomes independent of stenting location, questioning whether proximal LAD treatment should be regarded differently from stenting in any other coronary artery territory.
背景 指南建议在患有左前降支(LAD)近段狭窄的患者中进行心脏团队讨论和冠状动脉旁路移植术的考虑。有证据表明,近端 LAD 血管成形术的结果可能与非近段 LAD 部位的治疗没有区别。我们旨在确定使用薄壁药物洗脱支架进行近端 LAD 段经皮冠状动脉介入治疗的患者的临床结果与非近段 LAD 血管成形术的比较。
方法和结果 在这项对 e-Ultimaster 注册研究的分析中,比较了接受近端 LAD 区域血管成形术的患者与接受非近段 LAD 部位治疗的患者。使用多变量分析和倾向评分来调整组间的差异。主要终点是靶病变失败:包括心源性死亡、靶病变相关心肌梗死和/或 1 年随访时临床驱动的靶病变血运重建的复合终点。在 17805 例患者(平均年龄 64.2±11 岁,76%为男性)中,5452 例(30.6%)接受了近端 LAD 经皮冠状动脉介入治疗,12353 例(69.4%)接受了非近端 LAD 经皮冠状动脉介入治疗。近端 LAD 组的多支血管病变(48.7%比 43.5%;<0.001)和 2 倍更多的分叉病变(18.8%比 9.2%;<0.0001)。在进行倾向评分调整后,两组之间的靶病变失败没有差异(分别为 3.3%和 2.9%;近端 LAD 与非近端 LAD 血管成形术分别为 0.17)。多变量分析显示,近端 LAD 治疗不是靶病变失败的独立预测因素(比值比,1.07;95%CI,0.88-1.31;=0.48)。
结论 在 1 年随访时,无论支架位置如何,患者的临床结果相似,这质疑了近端 LAD 治疗是否应与任何其他冠状动脉区域的支架治疗不同对待。