Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, 2-16-1 Sugao, Kawasaki City, Kanagawa Prefecture, 216-8511, Japan.
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, NTT Medical Center Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Cardiovasc Interv Ther. 2023 Jul;38(3):287-298. doi: 10.1007/s12928-023-00932-z. Epub 2023 Apr 5.
There have been no studies comparing clinical outcomes of physiology-guided revascularization in patients with unprotected left main coronary disease (ULMD) between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes between PCI and CABG of patients with physiologically significant ULMD. From an international multicenter registry of ULMD patients interrogated with instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), we analyzed data from 151 patients (85 PCI vs. 66 CABG) who underwent revascularization according to the cutoff value of iFR ≤ 0.89. Propensity score matching was employed to adjust for baseline clinical characteristics. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. The secondary endpoints were the individual components of the primary endpoint. Mean age was 66.6 (± 9.2) years, 79.2% male. Mean SYNTAX score was 22.6 (± 8.4) and median iFR was 0.83 (IQR 0.74-0.87). After performing propensity score matching analysis, 48 patients treated with CABG were matched to those who underwent PCI. At a median follow-up period of 2.8 years, the primary endpoint occurred in 8.3% in PCI group and 20.8% in CABG group, respectively (HR 3.80; 95% CI 1.04-13.9; p = 0.043). There was no difference in each component of the primary event (p > 0.05 for all). Within the present study, iFR-guided PCI was associated with lower cardiovascular events rate in patients with ULMD and intermediate SYNTAX score, as compared to CABG. State-of-the-art PCI vs. CABG for ULMD. Study design and primary endpoint in patients with physiologically significant ULMD. MACE was defined as the composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. The blue line denotes the PCI arm, and the red line denotes the CABG arm. PCI was associated with significantly lower risk of MACE than CABG. CABG: coronary artery bypass grafting; iFR: instantaneous wave-free ratio; MACE: major adverse cardiovascular events; PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention; ULMD: unprotected left main coronary artery disease.
目前尚无研究比较无保护左主干冠状动脉疾病(ULMD)患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)与冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的生理学指导血运重建的临床结局。本研究旨在评估瞬时无波比(iFR)检测的生理学意义显著的 ULMD 患者中,PCI 与 CABG 的长期临床结局。我们对接受 iFR 检测的 ULMD 患者的国际多中心登记处进行分析,纳入了 151 例患者(85 例行 PCI,66 例行 CABG),根据 iFR≤0.89 的截值进行血运重建。采用倾向评分匹配法调整基线临床特征。主要终点为全因死亡、非致死性心肌梗死和缺血驱动的靶病变血运重建的复合终点。次要终点为主要终点的各个组成部分。平均年龄为 66.6(±9.2)岁,79.2%为男性。平均 SYNTAX 评分为 22.6(±8.4),中位数 iFR 为 0.83(IQR 0.74-0.87)。行倾向评分匹配分析后,48 例 CABG 治疗患者与接受 PCI 治疗的患者相匹配。中位随访 2.8 年后,PCI 组和 CABG 组的主要终点事件发生率分别为 8.3%和 20.8%(HR 3.80;95%CI 1.04-13.9;p=0.043)。各组主要事件的组成部分无差异(p>0.05)。在本研究中,与 CABG 相比,iFR 指导的 PCI 治疗 ULMD 患者和中等 SYNTAX 评分患者的心血管事件发生率较低。无保护左主干病变的 PCI 与 CABG 比较。研究设计和生理学意义显著的 ULMD 患者的主要终点事件。MACE 定义为全因死亡、非致死性心肌梗死和靶病变血运重建的复合终点。蓝线表示 PCI 组,红线表示 CABG 组。与 CABG 相比,PCI 组的 MACE 风险显著降低。CABG:冠状动脉旁路移植术;iFR:瞬时无波比;MACE:主要不良心血管事件;PCI:经皮冠状动脉介入治疗;ULMD:无保护左主干冠状动脉疾病。