Search

Background: Intraoperative graft assessment with tools like Transit Time Flow Measurement (TTFM) is imperative for quality control in coronary surgery. We investigated the variation of TTFM parameters before and after protamine administration to identify new benchmark parameters for graft quality assessment. Methods: The database of the REQUEST (“REgistry for QUality AssESsmenT with Ultrasound Imaging and TTFM in Cardiac Bypass Surgery”) study was retrospectively reviewed. A per graft analysis was performed. Only single grafts (i.e., no sequential nor composite grafts) where both pre- and post-protamine TTFM values were recorded with an acoustical coupling index > 30% were included. Grafts with incomplete data and mixed grafts (arterio-venous) were excluded. A second analysis was performed including single grafts only in the same MAP range pre- and post- protamine administration. Results: After adjusting for MAP, we found a small increase in MGF (29 mL/min to 30 mL/min, p = 0.009) and decrease in PI (2.3 to 2.2, p < 0.001) were observed after the administration of protamine. These changes were especially notable for venous conduits and for CABG procedures performed on-pump. Conclusion: The small changes in TTFM parameters observed before and after protamine administration seem to be clinically irrelevant, despite being statistically significant in aggregate. Our data do not support a need to perform TTFM measurements both before and after protamine administration. A single TTFM measurement taken either before or after protamine may suffice to achieve reliable data on each graft’s performance. Depending on the specific clinical situation and intraoperative changes, more measurements may be informative. Trial registration: Clinical Trials Number: NCT02385344, registered February 17th, 2015.

Numerous studies have demonstrated a paradoxical association between higher baseline body mass index (BMI) and lower long-term mortality risk after coronary revascularization, known as the “obesity paradox”, possibly relying on the single use of BMI. The current study is a post-hoc analysis of the SYNTAX Extended Survival (SYNTAXES) trial, which is the extended follow-up of the SYNTAX trial comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) in patients with left-main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) or three-vessel disease (3VD). Patients were stratified according to baseline BMI and/or waist circumference (WC). Out of 1,800 patients, 1,799 (99.9%) and 1,587 (88.2%) had available baseline BMI and WC data, respectively. Of those, 1,327 (73.8%) patients had High BMI (≥25 kg/m2), whereas 705 (44.4%) patients had High WC (>102 cm for men or >88 cm for women). When stratified by both BMI and WC, 10-year mortality risk was significantly higher in patients with Low BMI/Low WC (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09 to 2.51), Low BMI/ High WC (adjusted HR: 2.74; 95% CI: 1.12 to 6.69), or High BMI/High WC (adjusted HR: 1.59; 95% CI: 1.11 to 2.27) compared to those with High BMI/Low WC. In conclusion, the “obesity paradox” following coronary revascularization would be driven by low long-term mortality risk of the High BMI/Low WC group. Body composition should be assessed by the combination of BMI and WC in the appropriate evaluation of the long-term risk of obesity in patients with LMCAD or 3VD.

Objectives: We investigated the impact of total stent length (TSL) and average nominal stent diameter (ASD) on 10-year mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the SYNTAXES trial. Background: TSL and ASD in patients treated with PCI are associated with major adverse cardiovascular events. However, the treatment effect of PCI with extensive and/or small stenting as compared with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for complex coronary artery disease has not been fully evaluated. Methods: Impacts on mortality of extensive stenting defined as TSL >100 mm and small stenting as ASD <3 mm were analyzed in 893 PCI patients and were compared to 865 CABG patients. Results: TSL as a continuous variable was significantly associated with 10-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.05 [1.01–1.09] per 10 mm increase). PCI patients with extensive stenting had a higher 10 year mortality than CABG patients (adjusted HR, 1.97 [1.41–2.74]) or not- extensive stenting PCI (adjusted HR, 1.94 [1.36–2.77]). Although ASD did not have a significant association with 10 year mortality (adjusted HR, 0.97 [0.85–1.11] per 0.25 mm increase), PCI with small stents was associated with a higher 10 year mortality, compared to CABG (adjusted HR, 1.66 [1.23–2.26]) and PCI performed with large stents (adjusted HR, 1.74 [1.19–2.53]). Patients treated with not-extensive and large stents had similar mortality rates (24.0 versus 23.8%) as those treated with CABG. Conclusions: Extensive and small stenting were associated with higher 10 year mortality, compared with CABG. When patients have to be treated with extensive or small stenting, revascularization with CABG should be preferred.

Background: The significant interaction between major infection and 5-year mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) for complex coronary artery disease (CAD) was observed previously. However, the very long-term outcomes beyond 5 years remains unclear. Methods and results: This is a subgroup analysis of the SYNTAX Extended Survival (SYNTAXES) trial, which is the extended follow-up of the randomized SYNTAX trial comparing PCI versus CABG in patients with three-vessel disease (3VD) or left-main CAD (LMCAD). Out of 1517 patients enrolled in the SYNTAX trial with available survival status from 5 to 10 years, 140 patients had experienced major infections and survived at 5 years (major infection group). From 5 to 10 years, the mortality of major infection group was 19.8% whereas the mortality of no major infection group was 15.1% (p = 0.157). After the adjustment of other clinical factors, the risk of mortality from 5 to 10 years did not significantly differ between major infection and no major infection groups (HR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.62–1.96; p = 0.740). When stratified by the presence or absence of periprocedural major infections, defined as a major infection within 60 days after index procedure, there was also no significant difference in 10-year mortality between two groups (30.8% vs. 24.5%; p = 0.057). Conclusions: Despite the initial association between major infections and 5 years mortality, postprocedural major infection was not evident in the 10 years follow-up, suggesting that the impact of major infection on mortality subsided over time beyond 5 years. Trial registration: SYNTAXES ClinicalTrials.gov reference: NCT03417050 SYNTAX ClinicalTrials.gov reference: NCT00114972