Non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes with previous coronary artery bypass grafting: is a routine invasive strategy needed?

Frans J Beerkens,Deepak L Bhatt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae287

IF: 39.3

2024-06-08

European Heart Journal

Abstract:CABG, coronary artery bypass graft surgery; NSTE-ACS, non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; SVG, saphenous vein graft.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes with previous coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis of invasive vs. conservative management

Matthew Kelham,Rohan Vyas,Rohini Ramaseshan,Krishnaraj Rathod,Robbert J de Winter,Ruben W de Winter,Bjorn Bendz,Holger Thiele,Geir Hirlekar,Nuccia Morici,Aung Myat,Lampros K Michalis,Juan Sanchis,Vijay Kunadian,Colin Berry,Anthony Mathur,Daniel A Jones

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae245

IF: 39.3

2024-05-30

European Heart Journal

Abstract:Background and Aims A routine invasive strategy is recommended in the management of higher risk patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACSs). However, patients with previous coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery were excluded from key trials that informed these guidelines. Thus, the benefit of a routine invasive strategy is less certain in this specific subgroup. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted. A comprehensive search was performed of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Eligible studies were RCTs of routine invasive vs. a conservative or selective invasive strategy in patients presenting with NSTE-ACS that included patients with previous CABG. Summary data were collected from the authors of each trial if not previously published. Outcomes assessed were all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction, and cardiac-related hospitalization. Using a random-effects model, risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Results Summary data were obtained from 11 RCTs, including previously unpublished subgroup outcomes of nine trials, comprising 897 patients with previous CABG (477 routine invasive, 420 conservative/selective invasive) followed up for a weighted mean of 2.0 (range 0.5–10) years. A routine invasive strategy did not reduce all-cause mortality (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.97–1.29), cardiac mortality (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.70–1.58), myocardial infarction (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.65–1.23), or cardiac-related hospitalization (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.78–1.40). Conclusions This is the first meta-analysis assessing the effect of a routine invasive strategy in patients with prior CABG who present with NSTE-ACS. The results confirm the under-representation of this patient group in RCTs of invasive management in NSTE-ACS and suggest that there is no benefit to a routine invasive strategy compared to a conservative approach with regard to major adverse cardiac events. These findings should be validated in an adequately powered RCT.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Clinical Outcomes and Risk Factors of Coronary Artery Aneurysms after Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation for Chronic Total Occlusions

Xin Zhong,Hua Li,Chenguang Li,Nobel Zong,David Liem,X'avia Chan,Shuning Zhang,Youen Zhang,Xinggang Wang,Xing Wu,Wenbin Zhang,Kang Yao,Xuebo Liu,Lei Ge,Kai Hu,Juying Qian,Mario Deng,Junbo Ge

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchv.2014.06.004

2014-01-01

Abstract:ObjectiveThe study aimed to analyze the risk factors and long-term outcomes associated with coronary artery aneurysms (CAAs) after successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in patients with CTOs.BackgroundThere are sporadic data available on post-procedure CAAs after transcatheter revascularization for CTOs.Methods and resultsA total of 141 patients with 149 CTOs who underwent successful CTO-PCI and DES implantation with angiographic follow-up from 2004 to 2010 were included. Patients were divided into CAA group and non-CAA group according to the presence of CAAs in the follow-up angiography. The independent predictors and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) including cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and target-vessel revascularization (TVR) were compared between two groups. The incidence of CAAs was 11.4% (17/149) after index procedure. Multivariate analysis showed that age (OR: 0.925, CI 0.873–0.980, P = 0.008), ostial occlusion (OR: 6.715, CI 1.473–30.610, P = 0.014), the parallel wire technique (OR: 6.167, CI 1.709–22.259, P = 0.005) and DES length (OR: 1.030, CI 1.002–1.058, P = 0.036) were the independent predictors of CAAs after successful CTO-PCI and DES implantation. MACEs were similar between two groups (adjusted hazard ratio 0.670; 95% CI 0.160–2.808; P = 0.584) during the 5-year follow-up.ConclusionsThe independent predictors of CAAs after successful CTO-PCI and DES implantation are age, ostial occlusion, the parallel wire technique and DES length. CAAs after index procedure are not frequently associated with adverse clinical events under dual antiplatelet therapy. Further large clinical studies are warranted to explore the clinical implications of patients with this distinct new entity.
Coronary artery bypass grafting in acute coronary syndromes: modern indications and approaches

Sigrid Sandner,Alissa Florian,Marc Ruel

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/HCO.0000000000001172

2024-08-12

Abstract:Purpose of review: Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, with approximately 1.2 million hospitalizations annually in the U.S. This review aims to explore the contemporary evidence regarding revascularization strategies, including percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), in ACS patients. It also addresses the unresolved questions concerning the optimal procedural aspects of surgery and antithrombotic therapy for secondary prevention postsurgery. Recent findings: Recent studies highlight that while PCI is generally preferred for its timeliness in high-risk non-ST-elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS) patients, CABG offers a benefit in terms of cardiovascular events in those with multivessel disease, particularly in the presence of diabetes and higher coronary disease complexity. For ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), CABG is less frequently utilized due to the preference for primary PCI, but it remains crucial for patients with complex anatomy or failed PCI. Furthermore, the optimal timing and type of antiplatelet therapy post-CABG remain controversial, with current evidence supporting the use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to reduce ischemic events but necessitating careful management to balance bleeding risks. Summary: In patients with ACS, the choice between PCI and CABG depends on the complexity of coronary disease and patient comorbidities. CABG is particularly beneficial for multivessel disease in NSTE-ACS and specific STEMI cases where PCI is not feasible. The management of antiplatelet therapy postsurgery requires a nuanced approach to minimize bleeding risks while preventing thrombotic complications. Further randomized clinical trials are needed to solidify these findings and guide clinical practice.
Outcomes of management strategies in patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting presenting with an acute coronary syndrome

Pishoy Gouda,Sunjidatul Islam,Douglas C. Dover,Padma Kaul,Kevin R. Bainey,Robert C. Welsh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2024.117477

IF: 5.3

2024-02-18

Atherosclerosis

Abstract:Background Patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) presenting with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have poor outcomes and the optimal treatment strategy for this population is unknown. Methods Using linked administrative databases, we examined patients with an ACS between 2008 and 2019, identifying patients with prior CABG. Patients were categorized by ACS presentation type and treatment strategy. Our primary outcome was the composite of death and recurrent myocardial infarction at one-year. Results Of 54,641 patients who presented with an ACS, 1670 (3.1%) had a history of prior CABG. Of those, 11.0% presented with an ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) of which, 15.3% were treated medically, 31.1% underwent angiography but were treated medically, 22.4% with fibrinolytic therapy and 31.1% with primary PCI. The primary outcome rate was the highest (36.8%) in patients who did not undergo angiography and was similar in the primary PCI (20.8%) and fibrinolytic group (21.9%). In patients presenting with a non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) (89.0%), 33.2% were treated medically, 38.5% underwent angiography but were treated medically and 28.2% were treated with PCI. Compared to those who underwent PCI, patients treated conservatively demonstrated a higher risk of the composite outcome (14.8% vs 27.3%; adjusted hazard ratio 1.70, 95% confidence interval 1.22–2.37). Conclusions Patients with prior CABG presenting with an ACS are often treated conservatively without PCI, which is associated with a higher risk of adverse events.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems,peripheral vascular disease
Early invasive versus non-invasive assessment in patients with suspected non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome

Thomas A Kite,Andrew Ladwiniec,J Ranjit Arnold,Gerry P McCann,Alastair J Moss

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2020-318778

IF: 5.7

2021-07-07

Heart

Abstract:Non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) comprises a broad spectrum of disease ranging from unstable angina to myocardial infarction. International guidelines recommend a routine invasive strategy for managing patients with NSTE-ACS at high to very high-risk, supported by evidence of improved composite ischaemic outcomes as compared with a selective invasive strategy. However, accurate diagnosis of NSTE-ACS in the acute setting is challenging due to the spectrum of non-coronary disease that can manifest with similar symptoms. Heterogeneous clinical presentations and limited uptake of risk prediction tools can confound physician decision-making regarding the use and timing of invasive coronary angiography (ICA). Large proportions of patients with suspected NSTE-ACS do not require revascularisation but may unnecessarily undergo ICA with its attendant risks and associated costs. Advances in coronary CT angiography and cardiac MRI have prompted evaluation of whether non-invasive strategies may improve patient selection, or whether tailored approaches are better suited to specific subgroups. Future directions include (1) better understanding of risk stratification as a guide to investigation and therapy in suspected NSTE-ACS, (2) randomised clinical trials of non-invasive imaging versus standard of care approaches prior to ICA and (3) defining the optimal timing of very early ICA in high-risk NSTE-ACS.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
A systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention compared to coronary artery bypass grafting in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome

Hristo Kirov,Tulio Caldonazo,Mohamed Rahouma,N. Bryce Robinson,Michelle Demetres,Patrick W. Serruys,Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai,Mario Gaudino,Torsten Doenst

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-09158-0

IF: 4.6

2022-03-24

Scientific Reports

Abstract:Abstract Non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) affects millions of patients. Although an invasive strategy can improve survival, the optimal treatment [i.e., percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)] is not clear. We performed a meta-analysis of studies reporting outcomes between PCI and CABG in patients with NSTE-ACS. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were assessed. The primary outcome was long-term mortality. Inverse variance method and random model were performed. We identified 13 observational studies (48,891 patients). No significant difference was found in the primary endpoint [CABG vs. PCI, incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70; 1.23]. CABG was associated with lower long-term major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (IRR 0.64, 95% CI 0.54; 0.76) and lower long-term re-revascularization (IRR 0.37, 95% CI 0.30; 0.47). There was no significant difference in long-term myocardial infarction (CABG vs. PCI, IRR 0.96, 95% CI 0.50; 1.84) and peri-operative mortality (CABG vs. PCI, odds ratio 1.36, 95% CI 0.94; 1.95). For the treatment of NSTE-ACS, CABG and PCI are associated with similar rates of long-term mortality and myocardial infarction. CABG is associated with lower rates of long-term MACE and re-revascularization. Randomized comparisons in this setting are necessary.

multidisciplinary sciences
Coronary bypass surgery guided by computed tomography in a low-risk population

Patrick W Serruys,Shigetaka Kageyama,Giulio Pompilio,Daniele Andreini,Gianluca Pontone,Saima Mushtaq,Mark La Meir,Johan De Mey,Kaoru Tanaka,Torsten Doenst,Ulf Teichgräber,Ulrich Schneider,John D Puskas,Jagat Narula,Himanshu Gupta,Vikram Agarwal,Jonathon Leipsic,Shinichiro Masuda,Nozomi Kotoku,Tsung-Ying Tsai,Scot Garg,Marie-Angele Morel,Yoshinobu Onuma

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae199

IF: 39.3

2024-04-08

European Heart Journal

Abstract:In patients with three-vessel disease and/or left main disease, selecting revascularization strategy based on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) has a high level of virtual agreement with treatment decisions based on invasive coronary angiography (ICA). In this study, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) procedures were planned based on CCTA without knowledge of ICA. The CABG strategy was recommended by a central core laboratory assessing the anatomy and functionality of the coronary circulation. The primary feasibility endpoint was the percentage of operations performed without access to the ICA. The primary safety endpoint was graft patency on 30-day follow-up CCTA. Secondary endpoints included topographical adequacy of grafting, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular (MACCE), and major bleeding events at 30 days. The study was considered positive if the lower boundary of confidence intervals (CI) for feasibility was ≥75% (NCT04142021). The study enrolled 114 patients with a mean (standard deviation) anatomical SYNTAX score and Society of Thoracic Surgery score of 43.6 (15.3) and 0.81 (0.63), respectively. Unblinding ICA was required in one case yielding a feasibility of 99.1% (95% CI 95.2%–100%). The concordance and agreement in revascularization planning between the ICA- and CCTA-Heart Teams was 82.9% with a moderate kappa of 0.58 (95% CI 0.50–0.66) and between the CCTA-Heart Team and actual treatment was 83.7% with a substantial kappa of 0.61 (95% CI 0.53–0.68). The 30-day follow-up CCTA in 102 patients (91.9%) showed an anastomosis patency rate of 92.6%, whilst MACCE was 7.2% and major bleeding 2.7%. CABG guided by CCTA is feasible and has an acceptable safety profile in a selected population of complex coronary artery disease. Overview of the FAST TRACK CABG trial. ICA, invasive coronary angiography; CABG, coronary artery bypass grafting; CCTA, coronary computed tomography angiography; LAD, left anterior descending coronary artery; RA, radial artery; OM, obtuse marginal branch; LIMA, left internal mammary artery; D1, diagonal branch.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Unveiling Cardiovascular Outcomes: A Comparative Analysis of CABG Recipients versus Non-CABG Patients in the Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS)

Naser Aslanabadi,Ahmad Separham,Hormoz Golshani,Elnaz Javanshir,Razieh Parizad,Ahmad Ahmadzadehpournaky

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31661/gmj.v13i.3260

2024-06-27

Abstract:Background: The history of bypass surgery for coronary arteries and subsequent coronary angioplasty is a crucial and vital issue for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). This study aims to investigate and compare the occurrence of cardiovascular events in patients with a history of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG) versus those without such a history, specifically focusing on individuals diagnosed with ACS. Materials and methods: This cohort study was conducted at Madani Hospital in Tabriz, Iran. Patients diagnosed with ACS who were hospitalized and underwent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) from the beginning of 2018 to the beginning of 2020 were included. The records for follow-up regarding mortality and cardiovascular events were documented for the next three years (2020 to 2023). Subsequently, patients were categorized into two groups: those with a history of CABG and those without a history of CABG. Patients of each study group were divided into two groups: ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (STEA)CS/primary PCI and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS)/PCI, a total of approximately 473 cases were collected. The study groups were compared in terms of in-hospital and long-term cardiovascular events as well as other clinical outcomes. Results: A comparison of hospital and long-term events between the CABG group and the control group demonstrated a significant difference only in cases of recurrent myocardial infarction (MI)/ACS in long-term events (P=0.001). Additionally, comparing hospital and long-term events in the CABG group and the STEACS/NSTEACS control group revealed a significant difference only in cases of recurrent MI/ACS in long-term events (P=0.05). Conclusion: Patients with a history of CABG may face a higher risk of cardiovascular events, especially in recurrent MI/ACS. A thorough examination and closer monitoring of this patient group are needed to ensure improvement and mitigate the risks associated with potential complications arising from previous CABG surgeries.
Early Invasive Strategy For Non-St Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis Of Randomized, Controlled Trials

Ying Li,Cuancuan Wang,Yue Nan,Hui Zhao,Zhongnan Cao,Xinping Du,Kuan Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0300060520966500

2020-01-01

Journal of International Medical Research

Abstract:ObjectivePatients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) benefit from coronary intervention, but the optimal timing for an invasive strategy is not well defined. This study aimed to determine whether an early invasive strategy (<12 hours) is superior to a delayed invasive strategy.MethodsTwelve studies of nine randomized, controlled trials of 8586 patients were included.ResultsThere were no significant differences in all-cause death (risk ratio [95% confidence interval]) (0.90, [0.77-1.06), re-myocardial infarction (re-MI) (0.95 [0.70-1.29]), major bleeding (0.97 [0.77-1.23]), and refractory ischemia (0.74 [0.53-1.05]) when we compared use of early and delayed invasive strategies. Furthermore, analysis of the effect of the chosen strategy on high-risk patients showed that the rate of composite death or re-MI was significantly decreased in patients with either a Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score >140 or with elevated troponin levels (risk ratio 0.82 [0.72-0.92]; risk ratio 0.84 [0.76-0.93], respectively).ConclusionsThis meta-analysis shows that an early angiographic strategy does not improve clinical outcome in patients with NSTE-ACS. An early invasive strategy might reduce the rate of composite death or re-MI in high-risk patients with GRACE risk scores >140 or elevated cardiac markers.
Acute coronary syndrome revascularization strategies with multi-vessel coronary artery disease

R. Jay Widmer,Kendall Hammonds,Timothy Mixon,Jose Emilio Exaire,Christopher Douglas Chiles,Giuseppe Tavilla,Molly I. Szerlip,J. Michael DiMaio

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2024.04.003

IF: 3.133

2024-04-06

The American Journal of Cardiology

Abstract:In acute coronary syndromes (ACS), revascularization is the standard of care. However, trials comparing contemporary coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are limited. Optimal revascularization in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease (MV-CAD) presenting with ACS is unclear. This is a multi-centred, retrospective observational study from a large, hospital system in the United States. We abstracted data on patients with MV-CAD and ACS from 2018 to 2022 who underwent revascularization with PCI, CABG or medically managed (MM). We evaluated multivariate statistics comparing categorical variables and outcomes, including all-cause mortality (ACM) and myocardial infarction (MI) at 1 year. All logistic and Cox proportional-hazard models were balanced using inverse probability treatment weights accounting for age and sex. There were 295 CABG patients [median age 66 (IQR 59.7, 73.1); 73% male], 1,559 PCI patients [median age 68.3 (IQR 60, 76.6); 69.1% male], and 307 MM patients [median age 70 (60.9, 77.1) 74% male]. Patients revascularized with PCI had higher ACM at 1 year [14.1% vs. 5.1%; HR 2.4, CI (1.5, 3.8), p<0.001] and similar mortality to MM (13.4%). CABG also demonstrated reduced 1 year MI rate compared to PCI (1.7% vs 3.9%; HR 0.36, CI 0.21, 0.61, p=<0.001), with similar 1 year rate of MI to MM (3.9%). In conclusion, CABG, compared to PCI and MM, is associated with lower mortality, and repeat ACS events at 1 year in patients with ACS and MV-CAD.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Total versus staged versus functional revascularization in NSTEACS patients with multivessel disease

Ahmed O Elkady,Mohamed Abdelghany,Reda Diab,Ahmed Ezz,Abdalla A Elagha

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s43044-021-00179-0

2021-06-26

Abstract:Background: The optimal strategy for revascularization in patients with NSTEACS who had multivessel coronary artery disease. A lack of evidence exists about the role of complete coronary revascularization by PCI in patients with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS). Till now, ACC/AHA and ESC guidelines are not clear regarding the optimal strategy for revascularization in NSTEACS patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. In this setting, identification of the culprit lesion by angiography only could be challenging. The objective is to compare the hospital and short-term (6 months) outcomes of 3 different coronary revascularization strategies in NSTEACS patients with and multivessel coronary artery disease. Results: Our study was a prospective study that included 90 patients who presented with acute chest pain and were diagnosed with NSTEACS. The patients were divided into 3 groups according to the plan of management: total revascularization group (total group), staged revascularization group (staged group), and functional revascularization group using FFR (FFR group). We studied the effect of demographic data, risk factors, and angiographic and procedural criteria on hospital and short-term outcomes. No significant statistical difference was seen among the three groups regarding the hospital outcome (in-stent thrombosis, unstable angina, and renal impairment). Also, the short-term (after 6 months) outcome regarding myocardial infarction, hospitalization, stroke, and cardiac death did not differ significantly between the three groups. Conclusions: Considering NSTEACS patients with multivessel disease, different coronary revascularization strategies (total, staged, or FFR) are comparable regarding immediate and short-term (6 months) clinical follow-up. FFR can change the preplanned management, and less number of stents per patient is needed when FFR is utilized.
Interventional therapy of the acute coronary syndromes

Gilbert L. Raff,William W. O'Neill

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1053/pcad.2002.124414

IF: 11.278

2002-05-01

Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases

Abstract:The acute coronary syndromes (ACS) have in common rupture of a vulnerable plaque, leading to exposure of the subendothelial surface and plaque core. The resultant thrombosis leads to a variable degree of flow occlusion, the extent of which differentiates the three syndromes and their treatment by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The guiding principle in the decision when to use PCI in the ACS is that the more time critical and high risk the clinical situation, the more likely it is that PCI will improve ultimate outcome. The use of risk stratification by clinical variables can lead to better triage of patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (MI) and unstable angina between PCI and medical management. Patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of prolonged ischemia should have an electrocardiogram searching for ST changes, a targeted physical, and blood drawn for rapid assay of cardiac enzymes. In the event that ST elevations suggest infarction, while medical therapy is initiated, emergency cardiac catheterization can be organized. PCI in ACS requires adjunctive antiplatelet and antithrombin therapy, and, in general, coronary stenting is advisable. Among patients with non-ST-elevation MI or unstable angina who can be medically stabilized, the presence of high clinical risk scores would favor early coronary angiography. In their absence, medical therapy can be pursued, unless recurrent ischemia occurs. When the patient's condition is stable, evaluation by stress testing can be used to guide further decisions.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
An initial invasive strategy in older patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes: it is never too late

J J Coughlan,Rory Durand,Robert A Byrne

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae255

IF: 39.3

2024-06-02

European Heart Journal

Abstract:Outcomes with invasive vs. conservative strategies in older patients with NSTE-ACS. Damman et al . reported aggregated results from FRISC-II, ICTUS and RITA3 trials in patients ≥75 years, Tegn et al . (After Eighty trial) enrolled exclusively patients ≥80 years, Kotanidis and colleagues aggregated data from trials including only older patients (>70 years). 1,10,11 MI = myocardial infarction, NSTE-ACS = non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Updated Strategies in Non-Culprit Stenosis Management of Multivessel Coronary Disease-A Contemporary Review

Rares-Dumitru Manuca,Alexandra Maria Covic,Crischentian Brinza,Mariana Floria,Cristian Statescu,Adrian Covic,Alexandru Burlacu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina60020263

2024-02-02

Abstract:The prevalence of multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients underscores the need for optimal revascularization strategies. The ongoing debate surrounding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), hybrid interventions, or medical-only management adds complexity to decision-making, particularly in specific angiographic scenarios. The article critically reviews existing literature, providing evidence-based perspectives on non-culprit lesion revascularization in ACS. Emphasis is placed on nuances such as the selection of revascularization methods, optimal timing for interventions, and the importance of achieving completeness in revascularization. The debate between culprit-only revascularization and complete revascularization is explored in detail, focusing on ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), including patients with cardiogenic shock. Myocardial revascularization guidelines and recent clinical trials support complete revascularization strategies, either during the index primary PCI or within a short timeframe following the culprit lesion PCI (in both STEMI and NSTEMI). The article also addresses the complexities of decision-making in NSTEMI patients with multivessel CAD, advocating for immediate multivessel PCI unless complex coronary lesions require a staged revascularization approach. Finally, the article provided contemporary data on chronic total occlusion revascularization in ACS patients, highlighting the prognostic impact. In conclusion, the article addresses the evolving challenges of managing multivessel CAD in ACS patients, enhancing thoughtful integration into the clinical practice of recent data. We provided evidence-based, individualized approaches to optimize short- and long-term outcomes. The ongoing refinement of clinical and interventional strategies for non-culprit lesion management remains dynamic, necessitating careful consideration of patient characteristics, coronary stenosis complexity, and clinical context.
Contemporary coronary artery bypass graft surgery and subsequent percutaneous revascularization

Frans J. Beerkens,Bimmer E. Claessen,Marielle Mahan,Mario F. L. Gaudino,Derrick Y. Tam,José P. S. Henriques,Roxana Mehran,George D. Dangas

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41569-021-00612-6

IF: 49.421

2021-10-05

Nature Reviews Cardiology

Abstract:Nature Reviews Cardiology, Published online: 05 October 2021; doi:10.1038/s41569-021-00612-6In this Review, Dangas and colleagues explore changes in coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgical techniques, differences in conduit vessel pathophysiology and the latest evidence for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with previous CABG surgery.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives

Lei Guo,Haichen Lv,Xiaomeng Yin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.753250

IF: 3.6

2022-04-11

Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine

Abstract:Coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO), which occurs in 18. 4–52% of all patients referred for coronary angiography, represents one of the last barriers in coronary intervention. Approximately half of all patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), who undergo coronary angiography, are diagnosed with coronary CTO. In fact, these patients often develop recurrent symptoms and events, necessitating revascularization. Currently, there is neither a consensus nor developed guidelines for the treatment of CTO patients with prior CABG, and the prognosis of these patients remains unknown. In this review, we discuss current evidence and future perspectives on CTO revascularization in patients with prior CABG, with special emphasis on clinical and lesion characteristics, procedural success rates, periprocedural complications, and long-term outcomes.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems
Do collaterals to infarct bed in STE-ACS patients undergoing emergent percutaneous coronary revascularization matter? An assessment of a prospective pool for in-hospital course

Rajesh Kumar,Naveed Ullah Khan,Ayaz Mir,Khalid Naseeb,Gulzar Ali,Arti Ashok,Mukesh Kumar,Abiha Urooj,Uroosa Safdar,Aisha Hussain,Muhammad Ishaq,Tahir Saghir,Jawaid Akbar Sial,Abdul Hakeem,Musa Karim

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2024.10.006

Abstract:Background: Limited data exist on the role of coronary collaterals circulation (CCC) in patients with ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (STE-ACS). This study aimed to assess CCC and the in-hospital course of patients with CCC undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI). Methods: The study included consecutive STE-ACS patients undergoing pPCI. Good CCC was defined as Rentrop collateral score (RCS) of 2-3. Patients with good and poor CCC were compared regarding clinical characteristics, angiographic patterns, and hospital course. Results: In the sample of 4683 patients, mean age was 55.6 ± 11 years, and 78.8 % were male. Good CCC was observed in 499 (10.7 %) patients. The rate of intra-procedure slow-flow/no-reflow (SF/NR) was 29.9 % vs. 20.5 % (p < 0.001), and the rate of composite adverse clinical outcomes (CACO) was 21.2 % vs. 19 % (p = 0.225) for patients with good and poor CCC, respectively. Multivariable analysis identified left ventricular end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP), multi-vessel disease (MVD), and thrombus grade ≥4 as independent predictors of good CCC, with adjusted odds ratios of 0.98 [0.97-0.99], 1.69 [1.35-2.10], and 3.45 [2.64-4.52], respectively. In propensity-matched cohorts, the intra-procedure SF/NR rate was 29.9 % vs. 26.9 % (p = 0.292), and the rate of CACO was 21.2 % vs. 23.4 % (p = 0.403) for patients with good and poor CCC, respectively. Conclusion: Angiographic evidence of good CCC in STE-ACS patients was limited. Good CCC was associated with a higher prevalence of MVD, high thrombus burden, and low pre-procedure LVEDP, resulting in a higher incidence of intra-procedure SF/NR. However, the CACO did not differ significantly between patients with good and poor CCC.
The Current State of Coronary Revascularization: Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Versus Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

Chayakrit Krittanawong,Affan Rizwan,Muzamil Khawaja,Noah Newman,Johao Escobar,Hafeez Ul Hassan Virk,Mahboob Alam,Fu'ad Al-Azzam,Celina M Yong,Hani Jneid

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-024-02090-x

2024-07-10

Abstract:Purpose of review: The optimal revascularization strategy for coronary artery disease depends on various factors, such as disease complexity, patient characteristics, and preferences. Including a heart team in complex cases is crucial to ensure optimal outcomes. Decision-making between percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting must consider each patient's clinical profile and coronary anatomy. While current practice guidelines offer some insight into the optimal revascularization approach for the various phenotypes of coronary artery disease, the evidence to support either strategy continues to evolve and grow. Given the large amount of contemporary data on revascularization, this review aims to comprehensively summarize the literature on coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention in patients across the spectrum of coronary artery disease phenotypes. Recent findings: Contemporary evidence suggests that for patients with triple vessel disease, coronary artery bypass grafting is preferred over percutaneous coronary intervention due to better long-term outcomes, including lower rates of death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. Similarly, for patients with left main coronary artery disease, both percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting can be considered, as they have shown similar efficacy in terms of major adverse cardiac events, but there may be a slightly higher risk of death with percutaneous coronary intervention. For proximal left anterior descending artery disease, both percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting are viable options, but coronary artery bypass grafting has shown lower rates of repeat revascularization and better relief from angina. The Synergy Between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery score can help in decision-making by predicting the risk of adverse events and guiding the choice between percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting. European and American guidelines both agree with including a heart team that can develop and lay out individualized, optimal treatment options with respect for patient preferences. The debate between coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention in multiple different scenarios will continue to develop as technology and techniques improve for both procedures. Risk factors, pre, peri, and post-procedural complications involved in both revascularization strategies will continue to be mitigated to optimize outcomes for those patients for which coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention provide ultimate benefit. Methods to avoid unnecessary revascularization continue to develop as well as percutaneous technology that may allow patients to avoid surgical intervention when possible. With such changes, revascularization guidelines for specific patient populations may change in the coming years, which can serve as a limitation of this time-dated review.
Influence of Previous Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting on Clinical Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Meta-Analysis of 250 684 Patients

Muhammad Omar Larik,Ayesha Ahmed,Abdul Rehman Shahid,Hamza Irfan,Areeka Irfan,Muhammad Jibran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/11795468241274588

2024-08-30

Abstract:Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), also known as coronary angioplasty, is the preferred strategy for treating obstructive coronary artery disease. Existing literature suggests the worsening of clinical outcomes in patients with previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) history. In light of this, a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. Methods: Databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ScienceDirect were utilized for the inclusive systematic search dating from inception to September 01, 2023. The risk of bias assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for cohort studies, and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials. Results: Ultimately, there were 16 eligible studies pooled together, involving a total of 250 684 patients, including 231 552 CABG-naïve patients, and 19 132 patients with a prior history of CABG. Overall, patients with CABG history were associated with significantly greater short-term mortality (P = .004), long-term mortality (P = .005), myocardial infarction (P < .00001), major adverse cardiovascular events (P = .0001), and procedural perforation (P < .00001). Contrastingly, CABG-naïve patients were associated with significantly greater risk of cardiac tamponade (P = .02) and repeat CABG (P = .03). No significant differences in stroke, bleeding, revascularization, or repeat PCI were observed. Conclusion: Comparatively worsened clinical outcomes were observed, as patients with prior CABG history typically exhibit complex coronary anatomy, and have higher rates of comorbidities in comparison to their CABG-naïve counterparts. The refinement of current procedural and surgical techniques, in conjunction with continued research endeavors, are needed in order to effectively address this trend.
Abstract 19050: Does Type of Culprit Lesion Matter in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome and Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention?

Ralf E Harskamp,Marcel A Beijk,Peter E Damman,Jan G Tijssen,Mitchell W Krucoff,Renato D Lopes,Robbert J de Winter

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.126.suppl_21.a19050

IF: 37.8

2012-11-20

Circulation

Abstract:Background: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery may be due to graft failure or progression of native coronary artery disease. We studied whether the culprit lesion (graft vs. native) is associated with differences in hospital and long-term outcomes. Methods: We included ACS patients with prior CABG who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of >=1 lesion at the Academic Medical Center - University of Amsterdam between 1998 and 2008. The primary outcome was 5-year mortality and the secondary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, myocardial infarction, need-for-revascularization and stroke. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to compare 5-year mortality between patients with graft vs. native culprit lesions. Predictors for 5-year mortality were identified using multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling with backwards variable selection. Logistic regression was used to assess predictors for in-hospital outcomes. Results: Overall, 270 patients were included, of which 146 (54.1%) had a graft culprit lesion. Mean age was 70 (SD=9.5yrs), 21.9% were women. Multi-vessel PCI was performed in 50 (18.5%) patients. 5-year mortality was similar following graft versus native culprit lesion PCI (41.3% vs. 36.4%, HR:1.16, 95%-CI:0.73-1.84, p=0.52). In-hospital death, MI, need-for-revascularization and/or stroke was also comparable (16.4% vs. 13.7%, HR:1.24 (95%-CI:0.63-2.43), p=0.53). Similar results were seen after adjusting for important covariates. Older age, lack of prior aspirin use, and cardiogenic shock were independently associated with worse clinical outcomes. Conclusion: Type of culprit lesion (either native or graft) in patients presenting with ACS and prior CABG surgery was not associated with in-hospital or long-term clinical outcomes. Larger studies to validate our findings are warranted.

cardiac & cardiovascular systems,peripheral vascular disease

Non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes with previous coronary artery bypass grafting: is a routine invasive strategy needed?

Non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes with previous coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis of invasive vs. conservative management

Clinical Outcomes and Risk Factors of Coronary Artery Aneurysms after Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation for Chronic Total Occlusions

Coronary artery bypass grafting in acute coronary syndromes: modern indications and approaches

Outcomes of management strategies in patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting presenting with an acute coronary syndrome

Early invasive versus non-invasive assessment in patients with suspected non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome

A systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention compared to coronary artery bypass grafting in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome

Coronary bypass surgery guided by computed tomography in a low-risk population

Unveiling Cardiovascular Outcomes: A Comparative Analysis of CABG Recipients versus Non-CABG Patients in the Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS)

Early Invasive Strategy For Non-St Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis Of Randomized, Controlled Trials

Acute coronary syndrome revascularization strategies with multi-vessel coronary artery disease

Total versus staged versus functional revascularization in NSTEACS patients with multivessel disease

Interventional therapy of the acute coronary syndromes

An initial invasive strategy in older patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes: it is never too late

Updated Strategies in Non-Culprit Stenosis Management of Multivessel Coronary Disease-A Contemporary Review

Contemporary coronary artery bypass graft surgery and subsequent percutaneous revascularization

Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives

Do collaterals to infarct bed in STE-ACS patients undergoing emergent percutaneous coronary revascularization matter? An assessment of a prospective pool for in-hospital course

The Current State of Coronary Revascularization: Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Versus Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

Influence of Previous Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting on Clinical Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Meta-Analysis of 250 684 Patients

Abstract 19050: Does Type of Culprit Lesion Matter in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome and Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention?