Literature DB >> 17080468

Trends in percutaneous versus surgical revascularization of unprotected left main coronary stenosis in the drug-eluting stent era: a report from the American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry (ACC-NCDR).

Henry W Huang1, Bruce N Brent, Richard E Shaw.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine how practice patterns for unprotected left main stenosis have changed with the advent of drug-eluting stents (DES).
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of unprotected left main coronary stenosis has been controversial.
METHODS: We analyzed data submitted to the American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry (ACC-NCDR) between January 1, 2002 and December 31, 2004 from 1,276,582 cardiac catheterizations at 417 institutions. Of these, 53,548 (4.2%) had left main stenosis >50% and no prior CABG. After excluding the unrevascularized, the patient sample (N = 32,562) was analyzed for PCI vs. CABG. Data was stratified by year/quarter, bare metal stent vs. DES, elective vs. urgent/emergent situations, LVEF < or > or =40%, and %left main and RCA stenosis.
RESULTS: Of unprotected left main revascularizations from 2002 to 2004, PCI increased from 17.0% to 21.9%, while CABG decreased from 83.0% to 78.1% (P < 0.0001). In 2002, bare metal stents were used for all PCIs; in 2004, bare metal stent use was only 25.5%, while DES use was 74.5% (P < 0.0001). Of elective procedures, PCI rose from 19.1% to 27.5% while CABG fell from 80.9% to 72.5% (P < 0.0001). Similar trends, all significant, were seen in every clinical situation.
CONCLUSIONS: In the era of DES, the rate of PCI for unprotected left main stenosis has risen, while CABG has declined. These findings are seen across varying clinical situations, including elective procedures. DES have rapidly and largely replaced bare metal stents for PCI of unprotected left mains. However, PCI is still chosen less frequently than CABG for unprotected left main revascularization.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17080468     DOI: 10.1002/ccd.20886

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1522-1946            Impact factor:   2.692


  12 in total

1.  Epidemiology and clinical impact of different anatomical phenotypes of the left main coronary artery.

Authors:  Davide Capodanno; Maria E Di Salvo; Dario Seminara; Anna Caggegi; Giombattista Barrano; Francesco Tagliareni; Fabio Dipasqua; Corrado Tamburino
Journal:  Heart Vessels       Date:  2010-10-27       Impact factor: 2.037

Review 2.  Evidence-based treatment of unprotected left main disease: a critical review of the literature.

Authors:  Peter Sharis; Nicolas W Shammas
Journal:  Curr Atheroscler Rep       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 5.113

3.  PCI or CABG for severe unprotected left main coronary artery disease: making sense of the NOBLE and EXCEL trials.

Authors:  Anthony A Holmes; Sripal Bangalore
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Unprotected Left Main Disease - A Review.

Authors:  Edward McNulty
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2013-03

5.  Drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents in unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Sanjay B Pandya; Young-Hak Kim; Sheridan N Meyers; Charles J Davidson; James D Flaherty; Duk-Woo Park; Anuj Mediratta; Karen Pieper; Eric Reyes; Robert O Bonow; Seung-Jung Park; Nirat Beohar
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 11.195

6.  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.

Authors:  Javier A Valle; Hector Tamez; J Dawn Abbott; Issam D Moussa; John C Messenger; Stephen W Waldo; Kevin F Kennedy; Frederick A Masoudi; Robert W Yeh
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 14.676

7.  Is availability of endoscopy changing initial management of vesicoureteral reflux?

Authors:  Caleb P Nelson; Hillary L Copp; Julie Lai; Christopher S Saigal
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-07-22       Impact factor: 7.450

8.  Angiographic validation of the American College of Cardiology Foundation-the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Collaboration on the Comparative Effectiveness of Revascularization Strategies study.

Authors:  Anjan K Chakrabarti; Maria V Grau-Sepulveda; Sean O'Brien; Cassandra Abueg; Angelo Ponirakis; Elizabeth Delong; Eric Peterson; Lloyd W Klein; Kirk N Garratt; William S Weintraub; C Michael Gibson
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2014-02-04       Impact factor: 6.546

9.  Changes in the Practice of Coronary Revascularization between 2006 and 2010 in the Republic of Korea.

Authors:  Yoon Jung Choi; Jin-Bae Kim; Su-Jin Cho; Jaelim Cho; Jungwoo Sohn; Seong-Kyung Cho; Kyoung Hwa Ha; Changsoo Kim
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 2.759

10.  Temporal Trends and Site Variation in High-Risk Coronary Intervention and the Use of Mechanical Circulatory Support: Insights From the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment Reporting and Tracking (CART) Program.

Authors:  Rory S Bricker; Thomas J Glorioso; Omar Jawaid; Mary E Plomondon; Javier A Valle; Ehrin J Armstrong; Stephen W Waldo
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2019-12-07       Impact factor: 5.501

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.