Leyva QAY, Arguedas AMA, Valdés RMA, Almeida GJ, Mendoza OJL, Brooks TJ, García HRA

Language: Spanish
References: 19
Page: 211-216
PDF size: 482.75 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Percutaneous coronary intervention in multivessel disease is a valid option for revascularization.
Objective: To assess the outcomes of multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel disease; and to identify variables that are predictors of major adverse cardiac events.
Method: A retrospective cohort and longterm survival study at the Hermanos Ameijeiras Hospital. Minimum follow-up was one year. The survival function was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier analysis, and univariate and multivariate analysis were used to identify predictors of major adverse cardiac events.
Results: A total of 191 lesions were treated in 87 patients, 11.5% of them had threevessel disease. The procedure was successful in 97.7% of cases, and radial access was the most commonly used (67.8%). The left anterior descending artery was the most frequently treated one (41%) and 77% of lesions treated were complex lesions (B2 and C). Some type of major adverse cardiac events occurred in 14.9% of the patients; 3.4% of them died from cardiac causes, 2.3% suffered a nonfatal acute myocardial infarction and 10.3% required repeat revascularization. The rate of adverse eventfree survival at one year was 89.16%.Three-vessel disease was the only variable that predicted, independently, the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events at one year [p = 0.01, OR 5.03 (1.18 to 21.3, 95% CI)].
Conclusions: Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention, in properly selected cases, leads to good results one year after surgery. Threevessel disease was associated, independently, with the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events during the follow-up.

REFERENCES

1. Ministerio de Salud Pública. Anuario Estadístico de Salud 2012. La Habana: Dirección Nacional de Re-gistros Médicos y Estadísticas; 2013.

2. Serruys PW, Unger F, Sousa JE, Jatene A, Bonnier HJ, Schonberger JP, et al. Comparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treat-ment of multivessel disease. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(15):1117-24.

3. Levine NG, Bates RE, Blankenship CJ, Bailey SR, Bittl JA, Cercek B, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. A Report of the American College of Cardiology Founda-tion/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovas-cular Angiography and Interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(24):e44-122.

4. Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein P, Colombo A, Holmes DR, Mack MJ, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(10):961-72.

5. Cassinelli Arana M. Cirugía de revascularización o intervencionismo en lesiones de tronco de la arte-ria coronaria izquierda: Un debate en curso. CorSa-lud [Internet]. 2012 [citado 21 Oct 2013];4(4):228-31. Disponible en:

6. http://bvs.sld.cu/revistas/cors/pdf/2012/v4n4a12/es/cabg-icp.pdf

7. Serruys P, Garg S. Intervencionismo coronario per-cutáneo para todos los pacientes con enfermedad coronaria compleja: enfermedad de tres vasos o del tronco izquierdo. ¿Verdadero? ¿Falso? ¿No se sabe? Rev Esp Cardiol. 2009;62(7):719-25.

8. Daemen J, Boersma E, Flather M, Booth J, Stables R, Rodriguez A, et al. Long-term safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention with stent-ing and coronary artery bypass surgery for multi-vessel coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis with 5-year patient-level data from the ARTS, ERACI-II, MASS-II, and SoS trials. Circulation. 2008; 118(11):1146-54.

9. Hlatky MA, Boothroyd DB, Bravata DM, Boersma E, Booth J, Brooks MM, et al. Coronary artery bypass surgery compared with percutaneous coronary in-terventions for multivessel disease: a collaborative analysis of individual patient data from ten ran-domised trials. Lancet. 2009;373(9670):1190-7.

10. Bravata DM, Gienger AL, McDonald KM, Sundaram V, Perez MV, Varghese R, et al. Systematic review: the comparative effectiveness of percutaneous

11. coronary interventions and coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147(10):703-16.

12. 10.Chase AJ, Fretz EB, Warburton WP, Klinke WP, Carere RG, Pi D, et al. The association of arterial access site at angioplasty with transfusion and mortality: the MORTAL study (Mortality benefit Of Reduced Transfusion After PCI via the arm or Leg). Heart. 2008;94(8):1019-25.

13. 11.Hannan E, Racz M, Holmes DR, King SB, Walford G, Ambrose JA, et al. Impact of completeness of per-cutaneous coronary intervention revascularization on long-term outcomes in the stent era. Circula-tion. 2006;113(20):2406-12.

14. 12.Hannan EL, Wu C, Walford G, Holmes DR, Jones RH, Sharma S, et al. Incomplete revascularization in the era of drug-eluting stents: impact on adverse out-comes. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2(1):17-25.

15. 13.Kim Y, Park DW, Lee JY, Kim WJ, Yun SC, Ahn JM, et al. Impact of angiographic complete revasculari-zation after drug-eluting stent implantation or coronary artery bypass graft surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2011;123(21): 2373-81.

16. 14.Boden WE, O’Rourke RA, Teo KK, Hartigan DJ, Ma-ron WJ, Kostuk WJ, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(15):1503-16.

17. 15.Lopes NH, Paulitsch FS, Gois AF, Pereira AC, Stolf NA, Dallan LO, et al. Impact of number of vessels disease on outcome of patients with stable coro-nary artery disease: 5-year follow-up of the Medi-cal, Angioplasty, and bypass Surgery Study (MASS). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2008;33(3):349-54.

18. 16.Roy P, Okabe T, Pinto TL, Steinberg HD, Smith K, Torguson R, et al. Correlates of clinical restenosis following intracoronary implantation of drug-elu-ting stents. Am J Cardiol. 2007;100(6):965-9.

19. 17.Rathore S, Terashima M, Katoh O, Matsuo H, Tana-ka N, Kinoshita Y, et al. Predictors of angiographic restenosis after drug eluting stents in the coronary arteries: contemporary practice in real world patients. EuroIntervention. 2009;5(3):349-54.