Key result
PCI in bifurcation lesions is linked to ~57% higher MACE risk versus non-bifurcation lesions.
Why the study?
PCI in coronary bifurcation lesions is common and technically demanding, but whether patients have adverse outcomes during follow-up after successful PCI is unclear.
Does PCI with DES in coronary bifurcation lesions increase major adverse cardiac events compared to non-bifurcation lesions in patients with coronary artery disease?
Meta-Analysis (n=23,891)
Does PCI with DES in coronary bifurcation lesions increase major adverse cardiac events compared to non-bifurcation lesions in patients with coronary artery disease?
Absolute Event Rate: 19% vs 12.1%
p-value: p=<0.001
In the contemporary DES era, percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions is associated with a significantly higher rate of major adverse cardiac events compared to non-bifurcation lesions.
Indicates higher MACE risk for bifurcation PCI despite DES; confirms lesion complexity as a persistent outcome determinant.
BACKGROUND: PCI in CBL is common and technically demanding. Whether such patients have adverse outcome during the follow-up after successful PCI is unclear. We aim to compare the clinical outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation of coronary bifurcation lesions (CBL) and non-CBL. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search to identify studies reporting the clinical outcome of patients undergoing PCI in CBL or not. Patients with left main disease constituted a predefined subgroup. Primary study end-point was major adverse cardiac events (MACE). RESULTS: Fifteen publications on 23 891 patients with coronary artery disease treated by DES in CBL or not were identified. Median follow-up length was 24 months (range: 12-60). MACE at the longest available follow-up were significantly higher in CBL as compared with non-CBL (19.0 vs. 12.1%, P < 0.001). Similar results were obtained in the subanalysis restricted to second-generation DES studies. The MACE rate was higher early, then decreased during the follow-up being, however, appreciable at all timings up to 36 months. In the left main (LM) subanalysis (four studies, 3210 patients), patients underwent DES implantation in distal LM, as compared with nondistal LM, had increased the MACE rate during the follow-up (27.4 vs. 17.4%, P < 0.001), which was driven by higher target vessel revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: In the contemporary DES era, CBL represent a subset of lesions associated with increased rate of MACE after PCI. This data prompt for studies aimed at improving the clinical outcomes of patients with CAD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Burzotta et al. (2020) conducted a meta-analysis in Coronary artery disease (n=23,891). PCI with DES in coronary bifurcation lesions (CBL) vs. PCI with DES in non-bifurcation lesions (non-CBL) was evaluated on Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (p=<0.001). PCI with drug-eluting stents in coronary bifurcation lesions was associated with a significantly higher rate of MACE compared to non-bifurcation lesions (19.0% vs. 12.1%, P<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: