Why the study?
Coronary sinus reducer implantation is safe and effective for refractory angina, but data regarding its clinical benefit over time are lacking.
Does coronary sinus reducer implantation provide sustained improvement in angina severity in patients with refractory angina?
Does coronary sinus reducer implantation provide sustained improvement in angina severity in patients with refractory angina?
Coronary sinus reducer implantation provides sustained long-term improvement in angina symptoms for patients with refractory angina, with an acceptable safety profile.
May support durable angina relief with coronary sinus reducer; hypothesis-generating and requires RCTs before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Coronary sinus (CS) narrowing by reducer implantation has emerged as a safe and effective therapy for patients suffering from refractory angina. However, data regarding the clinical benefit of this treatment over time is lacking. METHODS: Patients undergoing successful reducer implantation were enrolled prospectively to clinical registries at three medical centers. Those with more than 2-years of follow-up were included in the present analysis. Peri-procedural data, data regarding adverse events, and current evaluation of angina severity (Canadian Cardiovascular Society [CCS] class) were collected. RESULTS: Overall, 99 consecutive patients (77% males, mean age 69.8 ± 9.4) with severe angina were enrolled between September 2010 and October 2017 and included in the present analysis. No procedure-related complications were recorded. During a median follow up time of 3.38 years (IQR 2.95-4.40), 15.1% of the patients died, 9% experienced myocardial infarction (MI) and 21% underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Mean CCS class was 3.1 ± 0.5 at baseline, improved to 1.66 ± 0.8 at 1 year (p < .001), and remained low through 2-years and at last follow up (1.72 ± 0.8 and 1.71 ± 0.8, p > 0.5 for both, in comparison to 1 year). At baseline 91% of patients reported severe disabling angina (CCS class 3-4), at 1 year only 17.9% suffered from disabling angina, p < .001, and this portion remained low overtime (19% at last follow up). CONCLUSION: Long-term mortality of patients undergoing reducer implantation is similar to that reported for patients with stable coronary artery disease. The previously reported short-term efficacy of the reducer, reflected by significant improvement of angina symptoms, is maintained over time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Konigstein et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: