Search

The impact of left ventricular dysfunction on clinical outcomes following revascularization is not well established in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCA). In this study, we evaluated the impact of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on clinical outcomes of patients with ULMCA requiring revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG).The details of the design, methods, end points, and relevant definitions are outlined in the Gulf Left Main Registry: a retrospective, observational study conducted between January 2015 and December 2019 across 14 centres in 3 Gulf countries. In this study, the data on patients with ULMCA who underwent revascularization through PCI or CABG were stratified by LVEF into three main subgroups; low (l-LVEF40%), mid-range (m-LVEF 40-49%), and preserved (p-LVEF ≥50%). Primary outcomes were hospital major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and mortality and follow-up MACCE and mortality.A total of 2137 patients were included; 1221 underwent PCI and 916 had CABG. During hospitalization, MACCE was significantly higher in patients with l-LVEF [(10.10%), P = 0.005] and m-LVEF [(10.80%), P = 0.009], whereas total mortality was higher in patients with m-LVEF [(7.40%), P = 0.009] and p-LVEF [(7.10%), P = 0.045] who underwent CABG. There was no mortality difference between groups in patients with l-LVEF. At a median follow-up of 15 months, there was no difference in MACCE and total mortality between patients who underwent CABG or PCI with p-LVEF and m-LVEF.CABG was associated with higher in-hospital events. Hospital mortality in patients with l-LVEF was comparable between CABG and PCI. At 15 months' follow-up, PCI could have an advantage in decreasing MACCE in patients with l-LVEF.

Introduction: Evaluate the effects of baseline anemia and anemia following revascularization on outcomes in patients with Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery (ULMCA) disease. Methods: This was a retrospective, multicenter, observational study conducted between January 2015 to December 2019. The data on patients with ULMCA who underwent revascularization through PCI or CABG was stratified by hemoglobin level at baseline into anemic and non-anemic groups to compare in-hospital events. The pre-discharge hemoglobin following revascularization was categorized into very low (

Real-world data for managing patients with diabetes and left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease are scarce. We compared percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) outcomes versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in diabetes and LMCA disease patients.We retrospectively studied patients with LMCA presented to 14 centers from 2015 to 2019. The study included 2138 patients with unprotected LMCA disease; 1468 (68.7 %) had diabetes. Patients were grouped into; diabetes with PCI (n = 804) or CABG (n = 664) and non-diabetes with PCI (n = 418) or CABG (n = 252).In diabetes, cardiac (34 (5.1 %) vs. 22 (2.7 %); P = 0.016), non-cardiac (13 (2 %) vs. 6 (0.7 %); P = 0.027) and total hospital mortality (47 (7.1 %) vs. 28 (3.5 %); P = 0.0019), myocardial infarction (45 (6.8 %) vs. 11 (1.4 %); P = 0.001), cerebrovascular events (25 (3.8 %) vs. 12 (1.5 %); P = 0.005) and minor bleeding (65 (9.8 %) vs. 50 (6.2 %); P = 0.006) were significantly higher in CABG patients compared to PCI; respectively. The median follow-up time was 20 (10-37) months. In diabetes, total mortality was higher in CABG (P = 0.001) while congestive heart failure was higher in PCI (P = 0.001). There were no differences in major adverse cerebrovascular events and target lesion revascularization between PCI and CABG. Predictors of mortality in diabetes were high anatomical SYNTAX, peripheral arterial disease, chronic kidney disease, and cardiogenic shock.In this multicenter retrospective study, we found no significant difference in clinical outcomes during the short-term follow-up between PCI with second-generation DES and CABG except for lower total mortality and a higher rate of congestive heart failure in PCI group of patients. Randomized trials to characterize patients who could benefit from each treatment option are needed.

Currently, gender is not considered in the choice of the revascularization strategy for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. This study analyzed the effect of gender on the outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with ULMCA disease. Females who had PCI (n = 328) were compared with females who had CABG (n = 132) and PCI in males (n = 894) was compared with CABG (n = 784). Females with CABG had higher overall hospital mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) than females with PCI. Male patients with CABG had higher MACE; however, mortality did not differ between males with CABG vs PCI. In female patients, follow-up mortality was significantly higher in CABG patients, and target lesion revascularization was higher in patients with PCI. Male patients had no difference in mortality and MACE between groups; however, MI was higher with CABG, and congestive heart failure was higher with PCI. In conclusion, women with ULMCA disease treated with PCI could have better survival with lower MACE compared with CABG. These differences were not evident in males treated with either CABG or PCI. PCI could be the preferred revascularization strategy in women with ULMCA disease.

Coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) has been the standard of care for revascularization for patients with obstructive unprotected left main coronary disease (ULMCA). There have been multiple randomized and registry data demonstrating the technical and clinical efficacy of PCI in certain patients with ULMCA. The purpose of this study is to evaluate clinical outcomes of ULMCA PCI as compared to CABG in patients requiring revascularization in three Gulf countries. All ULMCA cases treated by PCI with DES versus CABG were retrospectively identified from 14 centers in 3 Arab Gulf countries (KSA, UAE, and Bahrain) from January 2015 to December 2019. In total, 2138 patients were included: 1222 were treated with PCI versus 916 with CABG. Patients undergoing PCI were older, and had higher comorbidities and mean European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE). Aborted cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock were reported more in the PCI group at hospital presentation. In addition, lower ejection fractions were reported in the PCI group. In hospital mortality and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) occurred more in patients undergoing CABG than PCI. At median follow-up of 15 months (interquartile range, 30), no difference was observed in freedom from revascularization, MACCE, or total mortality between those treated with PCI and CABG. While findings are similar to Western data registries, continued follow-up will be needed to ascertain whether this pattern continues into latter years.

The optimal stenting strategy for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease remains debated. This retrospective observational study (Gulf Left Main Registry) analyzed the outcomes of 1 vs 2 stents in patients with unprotected left main percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Overall, 1222 patients were evaluated; 173 had 1 stent and 1049 had 2 stents. The 2-stent group was older with more comorbidities, higher mean SYNTAX scores, and more distal bifurcation lesions. In the 1-stent group, in-hospital events were significant for major bleeding, and better mean creatinine clearance. At median follow-up of 20 months, the 1-stent group was more likely to have target lesion revascularization (TLR). Total mortality was numerically lower in the 1-stent group (.00% vs 2.10%); however, this was not statistically significant ( P=.068). Our analysis demonstrates the benefits of a 2-stent approach for ULMCA patients with high SYNTAX scores and lesions in both major side branches, while the potential benefit of a 1-stent approach for less complex ULMCA was also observed. Further studies with longer follow-up are needed to definitively demonstrate the optimal approach.

Introduction:Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a leading cause of death worldwide. The association of socioeconomic status with CAD is supported by numerous epidemiological studies. Whether such factors also impact the number of diseased coronary vessels and its severity is not well established.Materials and Methods:We conducted a prospective multicentre, multi-ethnic, cross sectional observational study of consecutive patients undergoing coronary angiography (CAG) at 5 hospitals in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Baseline demographics, socioeconomic, and clinical variables were collected for all patients. Significant CAD was defined as ≥70% luminal stenosis in a major epicardial vessel. Left main disease (LMD) was defined as ≥50% stenosis in the left main coronary artery. Multi-vessel disease (MVD) was defined as having >1 significant CAD.Results:Of 1,068 patients (age 59 ± 13, female 28%, diabetes 56%, hypertension 60%, history of CAD 43%), 792 (74%) were from urban and remainder (26%) from rural communities. Patients from rural centres were older (61 ± 12vs58 ± 13), and more likely to have a history of diabetes (63vs54%), hypertension (74vs55%), dyslipidaemia (78vs59%), CAD (50vs41%) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (27vs21%). The two groups differed significantly in terms of income level, employment status and indication for angiography. After adjusting for baseline differences, patients living in a rural area were more likely to have significant CAD (adjusted OR 2.40 [1.47, 3.97]), MVD (adjusted OR 1.76 [1.18, 2.63]) and LMD (adjusted OR 1.71 [1.04, 2.82]). Higher income was also associated with a higher risk for significant CAD (adjusted OR 6.97 [2.30, 21.09]) and MVD (adjusted OR 2.49 [1.11, 5.56]), while unemployment was associated with a higher risk of significant CAD (adjusted OR 2.21, [1.27, 3.85]).Conclusion:Communal and socioeconomic factors are associated with higher odds of significant CAD and MVD in the group of patients referred for CAG. The underpinnings of these associations (e.g.pathophysiologic factors, access to care, and system-wide determinants of quality) require further study.

Background Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) reduces morbidity and mortality in selected patients with heart failure, but up to one third of patients may not respond to CRT. A transmural postero-lateral (TMPL) wall scar in the left ventricle (LV) or over the LV pacing site may attenuate clinical and echocardiographic response to CRT. Methods and results We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for studies examining the association between Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR)-determined postero-lateral or LV pacing site scar and clinical and echocardiographic response to CRT. Eleven prospective studies were included. The presence of TMPL scar on pre-implant CMR was associated with a 75% lower chance of echocardiographic response to CRT, and a similarly lower chance of clinical response. Significant scar over LV pacing site on pre-implant CMR was also associated with a 46% lower chance of echocardiographic response to CRT, and a 67% lower chance of clinical response. Conclusions The presence of transmural postero-lateral scar or significant scar within the LV pacing site detected by pre-implant CMR is associated with a lower rate of clinical or echocardiographic response to CRT.

CRT has been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality in select heart failure patients. Upto 30-40% of heart failure patients may not respond to CRT. These, include patients with transmural scar in the posterolateral wall. Therefore, CMR Imaging was felt to be useful tool to asses patients for CRT.