CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

左主干支架

Abstract

Recommended Article

Comparative effectiveness analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with chronic kidney disease and unprotected left main coronary artery disease Contemporary Use and Trends in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the United States: An Analysis of the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Research to Practice Initiative Ten-Year All-Cause Death According to Completeness of Revascularization in Patients With Three-Vessel Disease or Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Insights From the SYNTAX Extended Survival Study Differences between the left main and other bifurcations Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Left Main Disease: Pre- and Post-EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Everolimus Eluting Stent Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) and NOBLE (Nordic-Baltic-British Left Main Revascularization Study) Era Intravascular Imaging and 12-Month Mortality After Unprotected Left Main Stem PCI: An Analysis From the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society Database 10-Year Outcomes of Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease A randomized clinical study comparing double kissing crush with provisional stenting for treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions: results from the DKCRUSH-II (Double Kissing Crush versus Provisional Stenting Technique for Treatment of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions) trial

Original ResearchVolume 16 Number 1

JOURNAL:Eurointervention. Article Link

Comparative effectiveness analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with chronic kidney disease and unprotected left main coronary artery disease

DW Kim, SY Om, MW Park et al. Keywords: LMCAD; renal insufficiency; eGFR; MACCE;

ABSTRACT

AIMS - Outcomes according to the status of renal insufficiency have not been fully evaluated in left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD). In the present study therefore, we sought to evaluate clinical outcomes in patients with significant LMCAD stratified by the degree of renal insufficiency and the relative clinical outcomes after PCI and CABG stratified by the differential levels of renal function using data from the large multinational all-comersInterventional Research Incorporation Society-Left MAIN Revascularization (IRIS-MAIN) registry.

 

METHODS AND RESULTS - Among 4,894 patients with LMCAD, renal insufficiency was graded according to the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), defined as death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or any revascularisation. The patients were stratified into three groups according to eGFR: 3,824 (78%) in group 1 (eGFR 60 ml·min1·1.73 m2), 838 (17%) in group 2 (eGFR 30 and <60), and 232 (5%) in group 3 (eGFR <30). At two years, after adjustment, compared with group 1, the risk of MACCE was significantly higher in group 2 (hazard ratio [HR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.18-1.79) and in group 3 (HR 3.39, 95% CI: 2.61-4.40). The p interaction for MACCE across groups was 0.20. The adjusted risk of MACCE was similar between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in groups 1 and 2. However, PCI was associated with a significantly higher risk of MACCE compared to CABG (HR 1.88, 95% CI: 1.08-3.25) in group 3.

 

CONCLUSIONS - The degree of renal insufficiency was proportionately associated with unfavourable outcomes in patients with LMCAD. In group 3, PCI was associated with a higher risk of MACCE compared with CABG. Also, the effect of PCI versus CABG on MACCE was consistent, with PCI being associated with less bleeding and CABG being associated with less repeat revascularisation.