Accuracy of the PARIS score and PCI complexity to predict ischemic events in patients treated with very thin stents in unprotected left main or coronary bifurcations

BACKGROUND: The PARIS risk score (PARIS-rs) and percutaneous coronary intervention complexity (PCI-c) predict clinical and procedural residual ischemic risk following PCI. Their accuracy in patients undergoing unprotected left main (ULM) or bifurcation PCI has not been assessed. METHODS: The predictive performances of the PARIS-rs (categorized as low, intermediate, and high) and PCI-c (according to guideline-endorsed criteria) were evaluated in 3,002 patients undergoing ULM/bifurcation PCI with very thin strut stents. RESULTS: After 16 (12-22) months, increasing PARIS-rs (8.8% vs. 14.1% vs. 27.4%, p < .001) and PCI-c (15.2% vs. 11%, p = .025) were associated with higher rates of major adverse cardiac events ([MACE], a composite of death, myocardial infarction [MI], and target vessel revascularization), driven by MI/death for PARIS-rs and target lesion revascularization/stent thrombosis for PCI-c (area under the curves for MACE: PARIS-rs 0.60 vs. PCI-c 0.52, p-for-difference < .001). PCI-c accuracy for MACE was higher in low-clinical-risk patients; while PARIS-rs was more accurate in low-procedural-risk patients. ≥12-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) was associated with a lower MACE rate in high PARIS-rs patients, (adjusted-hazard ratio 0.42 [95% CI: 0.22-0.83], p = .012), with no benefit in low to intermediate PARIS-rs patients. No incremental benefit with longer DAPT was observed in complex PCI. CONCLUSIONS: In the setting of ULM/bifurcation PCI, the residual ischemic risk is better predicted by a clinical risk estimator than by PCI complexity, which rather appears to reflect stent/procedure-related events. Careful procedural risk estimation is warranted in patients at low clinical risk, where PCI complexity may substantially contribute to the overall residual ischemic risk.