MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1161/circinterventions.122.012700

Медицинская библиотека · Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions · 2023

Deferred Versus Performed Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Disease With Hemodynamic Significance.

Warisawa Takayuki, Cook Christopher M, Ahmad Yousif, Howard James P, Seligman Henry, Rajkumar Christopher, Toya Takumi, Doi Shunichi, Nakajima Akihiro, Nakayama Masafumi, Vera-Urquiza Rafael, Yuasa Sonoka, Sato Takao, Kikuta Yuetsu, Kawase Yoshiaki, Nishina Hidetaka, Al-Lamee Rasha, Sen Sayan, Lerman Amir, Matsuo Hitoshi, Akashi Yoshihiro J, Escaned Javier, Davies Justin E

Многоцентровое исследованиеСтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

The majority of randomized controlled trials of revascularization decision-making excludes left main coronary artery disease (LMD). Therefore, contemporary clinical outcomes of patients with stable coronary artery disease and LMD with proven ischemia remain poorly understood. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes of physiologically significant LMD according to the treatment strategies of revascularization versus revascularization deferral.

METHODS

In this international multicenter registry of stable LMD interrogated with the instantaneous wave-free ratio, patients with physiologically significant ischemia (instantaneous wave-free ratio ≤0.89) were analyzed according to the coronary revascularization (n=151) versus revascularization deferral (n=74). Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for baseline clinical characteristics. The primary end point was a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem. The secondary end points were as follows: cardiac death or spontaneous LMD-related myocardial infarction; and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up period of 2.8 years, the primary end point occurred in 11 patients (14.9%) in the revascularized group and 21 patients (28.4%) in the deferred group (hazard ratio, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.20-0.89]; P=0.023). For the secondary end points, cardiac death or LMD-related myocardial infarction occurred significantly less frequently in the revascularized group (0.0% versus 8.1%; P=0.004). The rate of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem was also significantly lower in the revascularized group (5.4% versus 17.6%; hazard ratio, 0.20 [95% CI, 0.056-0.70]; P=0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients who underwent revascularization for stable coronary artery disease and physiologically significant LMD determined by instantaneous wave-free ratio, the long-term clinical outcomes were significantly improved as compared with those in whom revascularization was deferred.

Для цитирования: Warisawa Takayuki, Cook Christopher M, Ahmad Yousif, Howard James P, Seligman Henry, Rajkumar Christopher, Toya Takumi, Doi Shunichi, Nakajima Akihiro, Nakayama Masafumi, Vera-Urquiza Rafael, Yuasa Sonoka, Sato Takao, Kikuta Yuetsu, Kawase Yoshiaki, Nishina Hidetaka, Al-Lamee Rasha, Sen Sayan, Lerman Amir, Matsuo Hitoshi, Akashi Yoshihiro J, Escaned Javier, Davies Justin E. Deferred Versus Performed Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Disease With Hemodynamic Significance.. Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions. 2023. DOI: 10.1161/circinterventions.122.012700.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.