Login Register Cart 0
Generic placeholder image

Current Cardiology Reviews

Editor-in-Chief

ISSN (Print): 1573-403X
ISSN (Online): 1875-6557

Back
Journal Home About Journal Editorial Board Journal Insight Current Issue Volumes/Issues
Subscribe
Review Article

Invasive Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: From Anatomical Features to Mechanistic Differences

Author(s): Hristo Kirov, Tulio Caldonazo and Torsten Doenst*

Volume 20, Issue 6, 2024

Published on: 15 July, 2024

Article ID: e150724231978 Pages: 9

DOI: 10.2174/011573403X321064240715061250

Price: $65

conference banner
Abstract

There is debate on the best treatment for significant stenoses of the left main (LM) coronary artery. The available evidence is based on four randomized trials, which were either performed specifically to assess patients with LM disease (EXCEL, NOBLE, PRECOMBAT) or had a significant fraction of patients with this disease pattern (SYNTAX). A meta-analysis revealed no difference in periprocedural and 5-year mortality but demonstrated a significant reduction of spontaneous myocardial infarction (MI) with CABG. Furthermore, the recently published SWEDEHEART registry data have shown survival advantage and fewer MACCE with CABG for LM disease after adjustment. In general, patients with more severe coronary artery disease (CAD) appear to have a survival advantage with CABG both over PCI and medical therapy (independent of the presence or absence of LM stenosis), which is always associated with a reduction of spontaneous MI in the CABG arm. Since the nomenclature of LM disease does not automatically reflect the complexity of CAD, we review the nature of LM disease in this article. We mechanistically assess the treatment effects of PCI and CABG for patients with LM disease, which is rarely isolated, often distal, and mostly associated with varying degrees of single and multi-vessel disease. We conclude that in patients with isolated LM shaft lesions and associated diseases of low complexity, the risk of spontaneous MI is lower, and PCI may achieve similar long-term outcomes compared to CABG. Thus, heart teams are essential for selecting the best treatment option and should focus on assessing infarction risk in chronic CAD.

Keywords: Coronary artery bypass grafting, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery disease, LM stenosis, LM shaft, anatomical features.

Graphical Abstract

[1]
Taggart DP. Response by David Taggart, MD, PhD to the EXCEL Statement. 2019. Available from: https://www.tctmd.com/slide/response-david-taggart-md-phd-excel-statement
[2]
Yusuf S, Zucker D, Passamani E, et al. Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: Overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the coronary artery bypass graft surgery trialists collaboration. Lancet 1994; 344(8922): 563-70.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(94)91963-1] [PMID: 7914958]
[3]
Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 2019; 40(2): 87-165.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394] [PMID: 30165437]
[4]
Lawton JS, Tamis-Holland JE, Bangalore S, et al. 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI guideline for coronary artery revascularization: A report of the american college of cardiology/american heart association joint committee on clinical practice guidelines. Circulation 2022; 145(3): e18-e114.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000001038] [PMID: 34882435]
[5]
Ruel M, Falk V, Farkouh ME, et al. Myocardial revascularization trials. Circulation 2018; 138(25): 2943-51.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.035970] [PMID: 30566019]
[6]
Ben-Yehuda O, Chen S, Redfors B, et al. Impact of large periprocedural myocardial infarction on mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting for left main disease: An analysis from the EXCEL trial. Eur Heart J 2019; 40(24): 1930-41.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehz113] [PMID: 30919909]
[7]
Matthews R. Storks Deliver Babies (p = 0.008). Teach Stat 2000; 22(2): 36-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9639.00013]
[8]
Mohammad MA, Stone GW, Koul S, et al. On the natural history of coronary artery disease: A longitudinal nationwide serial angiography study. J Am Heart Assoc 2022; 11(21): e026396.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.122.026396] [PMID: 36300820]
[9]
d’Allonnes FR, Corbineau H, Le Breton H, Leclercq C, Leguerrier A, Daubert C. Isolated left main coronary artery stenosis: Long term follow up in 106 patients after surgery. Br Heart J 2002; 87(6): 544-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/heart.87.6.544] [PMID: 12010936]
[10]
Srinivas SK, Sunil B, Bhat P, Manjunath CN. Incidence, predictors, clinical profile, management and outcome of patients with isolated left main coronary artery ostial disease. Indian Heart J 2018; 70(2): 214-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2017.06.008] [PMID: 29716697]
[11]
Stone GW, Kappetein AP, Sabik JF, et al. Five-year outcomes after PCI or CABG for Left main coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2019; 381(19): 1820-30.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1909406] [PMID: 31562798]
[12]
Holm NR, Mäkikallio T, Lindsay MM, et al. Percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass grafting in the treatment of unprotected left main stenosis: Updated 5-year outcomes from the randomised, non-inferiority NOBLE trial. Lancet 2020; 395(10219): 191-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32972-1] [PMID: 31879028]
[13]
Park SJ, Kim YH, Park DW, et al. Randomized trial of stents versus bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2011; 364(18): 1718-27.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1100452] [PMID: 21463149]
[14]
Thuijs DJFM, Kappetein AP, Serruys PW, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial. Lancet 2019; 394(10206): 1325-34.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31997-X] [PMID: 31488373]
[15]
Surgeons withdraw support for heart disease advice 2019. Available from:https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p07xf5by
[16]
Sabatine MS, Bergmark BA, Murphy SA, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting in left main coronary artery disease: An individual patient data meta-analysis. Lancet 2021; 398(10318): 2247-57.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02334-5] [PMID: 34793745]
[17]
Persson J, Yan J, Angerås O, et al. PCI or CABG for left main coronary artery disease: the SWEDEHEART registry. Eur Heart J 2023; 44(30): 2833-42.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehad369] [PMID: 37288564]
[18]
Tam DY, Fang J, Rocha RV, et al. Real-world examination of revascularization strategies for left main coronary disease in Ontario, Canada. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2023; 16(3): 277-88.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2022.10.016] [PMID: 36609048]
[19]
De Filippo O, Di Franco A, Boretto P, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery surgery for left main disease according to lesion site: A meta-analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2023; 166(1): 120-132.e11.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2021.08.040] [PMID: 34538641]
[20]
Davidson LJ, Cleveland JC, Welt FG, et al. A practical approach to left main coronary artery disease: JACC state-of-the-art review. J Am Coll Cardiol 2022; 80(22): 2119-34.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2022.09.034] [PMID: 36423996]
[21]
Doenst T, Haverich A, Serruys P, et al. PCI and CABG for treating stable coronary artery disease: JACC review topic of the week. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019; 73(8): 964-76.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2018.11.053] [PMID: 30819365]
[22]
Kirov H, Caldonazo T, Riedel LL, et al. Comparing outcomes between coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention in octogenarians with left main or multivessel disease. Sci Rep 2023; 13(1): 22323.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-49069-2] [PMID: 38102297]
[23]
Kirov H, Fischer J, Caldonazo T, et al. Coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with chronic total occlusion. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2024.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1787014] [PMID: 38759955]
[24]
Song PS, Song YB, Yang JH, et al. Periprocedural myocardial infarction is not associated with an increased risk of long-term cardiac mortality after coronary bifurcation stenting. Int J Cardiol 2013; 167(4): 1251-6.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.03.146] [PMID: 22494861]
[25]
Abdallah MS, Wang K, Magnuson EA, et al. Quality of life after surgery or DES in patients with 3-vessel or left main disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017; 69(16): 2039-50.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.02.031] [PMID: 28427580]
[26]
Spertus JA, Jones PG, Maron DJ, et al. Health-Status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2020; 382(15): 1408-19.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1916370] [PMID: 32227753]
[27]
Carr KW, Engler RL, Ross J Jr. Do coronary artery bypass operations prolong life? West J Med 1982; 136(4): 295-308.
[PMID: 7046257]
[28]
Gaudino M, Audisio K, Hueb WA. Coronary artery bypass grafting versus medical therapy in patients with stable coronary artery disease: An individual patient data pooled meta-analysis of randomized trials. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2022.
[PMID: 35821087]
[29]
Velazquez EJ, Lee KL, Jones RH, et al. Coronary-artery bypass surgery in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. N Engl J Med 2016; 374(16): 1511-20.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1602001] [PMID: 27040723]
[30]
Perera D, Clayton T, O’Kane PD, et al. Percutaneous revascularization for ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2022; 387(15): 1351-60.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2206606] [PMID: 36027563]
[31]
Bonow RO, Maurer G, Lee KL, et al. Myocardial viability and survival in ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. N Engl J Med 2011; 364(17): 1617-25.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1100358] [PMID: 21463153]
[32]
Panza JA, Holly TA, Asch FM, et al. Inducible myocardial ischemia and outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 61(18): 1860-70.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.02.014] [PMID: 23500234]
[33]
Jones RH, Velazquez EJ, Michler RE, et al. Coronary bypass surgery with or without surgical ventricular reconstruction. N Engl J Med 2009; 360(17): 1705-17.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0900559] [PMID: 19329820]
[34]
Head SJ, Milojevic M, Daemen J, et al. Mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting for coronary artery disease: A pooled analysis of individual patient data. Lancet 2018; 391(10124): 939-48.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30423-9] [PMID: 29478841]
[35]
Caldonazo T, Kirov H, Riedel LL, Gaudino M, Doenst T. Comparing CABG and PCI across the globe based on current regional registry evidence. Sci Rep 2022; 12(1): 22164.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-25853-4] [PMID: 36550130]
[36]
Mortensen MB, Dzaye O, Steffensen FH, et al. Impact of plaque burden versus stenosis on ischemic events in patients with coronary atherosclerosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2020; 76(24): 2803-13.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2020.10.021] [PMID: 33303068]
[37]
Falk E, Shah PK, Fuster V. Coronary plaque disruption. Circulation 1995; 92(3): 657-71.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.92.3.657] [PMID: 7634481]
[38]
Kirov H, Caldonazo T, Mukharyamov M, et al. Cardiac Surgery 2023 reviewed. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2024.
[PMID: 38740368]
[39]
Gaudino M, Di Franco A, Spadaccio C. Difference in spontaneous myocardial infarction and mortality in percutaneous versus surgical revascularization trials: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2021.
[PMID: 34045061]
[40]
Williams MC, Moss AJ, Dweck M, et al. Coronary artery plaque characteristics associated with adverse outcomes in the SCOT-HEART study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019; 73(3): 291-301.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2018.10.066] [PMID: 30678759]
[41]
Sonaglioni A, Rigamonti E, Nicolosi GL, Lombardo M. Appropriate use criteria implementation with modified Haller index for predicting stress echocardiographic results and outcome in a population of patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging 2021; 37(10): 2917-30.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10554-021-02274-4] [PMID: 33961159]
[42]
Malinowski M, Deja MA, Gołba KS, Roleder T, Biernat J, Woś S. Perivascular tissue of internal thoracic artery releases potent nitric oxide and prostacyclin-independent anticontractile factor. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2008; 33(2): 225-31.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcts.2007.11.007] [PMID: 18083040]
[43]
Doenst T, Thiele H, Haasenritter J, Wahlers T, Massberg S, Haverich A. The treatment of coronary artery disease. Dtsch Arztebl Int 2022; 119(42): 716-23.
[PMID: 35912444]
[44]
Ibanez B, James S, Agewall S, et al. 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. Eur Heart J 2018; 39(2): 119-77.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehx393] [PMID: 28886621]
[45]
Andersen HR, Nielsen TT, Rasmussen K, et al. A comparison of coronary angioplasty with fibrinolytic therapy in acute myocardial in-farction. N Engl J Med 2003; 349(8): 733-42.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa025142] [PMID: 12930925]
[46]
Keeley EC, Boura JA, Grines CL. Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomised trials. Lancet 2003; 361(9351): 13-20.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(03)12113-7] [PMID: 12517460]
[47]
Zijlstra F, Hoorntje JCA, de Boer MJ, et al. Long-term benefit of primary angioplasty as compared with thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1999; 341(19): 1413-9.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199911043411901] [PMID: 10547403]
[48]
Kirov H, Caldonazo T, Rahouma M, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention compared to coronary artery bypass grafting in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome. Sci Rep 2022; 12(1): 5138.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-09158-0] [PMID: 35332253]
[49]
Doenst T, Bonow RO, Bhatt DL, Falk V, Gaudino M. Improving terminology to describe coronary artery procedures. J Am Coll Cardiol 2021; 78(2): 180-8.
[http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2021.05.010] [PMID: 34238439]
[50]
Karrowni W, Makki N, Dhaliwal AS, et al. Single versus double stenting for unprotected left main coronary artery bifurcation lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Invasive Cardiol 2014; 26(6): 229-33.
[PMID: 24907076]
[51]
Velazquez EJ, Pokorney SD, Szwed H. Abstract 16636: Left ventricular function and remodeling early after coronary artery bypass graft-ing compared with medical therapy: Results from the surgical treatment for ischemic heart failure (STICH)trial. Circulation 2014; 130: A16636-6.

Rights & Permissions Print Cite
Article Metrics
8
1
Wayfinder Image
© 2024 Bentham Science Publishers | Privacy Policy