Comparison of the Efficacy of Drug-eluting Stents Versus Bare-metal Stents for the Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

treatment of left main coronary artery （LMCA） disease in select patients. However, it is unclear whether drug-eluting stents （DESs） have better outcomes in patients with LMCA disease compared with bare-metal stent （BMS） during long-term follow-up in Chinese populations. Methods： From a perspective multicenter registry, 1136 consecutive patients, who underwent BMS or DES implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis, were divided into two groups： 1007 underwent DES implantation, and 129 underwent BMS implantation. The primary outcome was the rate of major adverse cardiac events （MACEs）, including cardiovascular （CV） death, myocardial infarction （MI）, and target lesion revascularization （TLR） at 5 years postimplantation. Results： Patients in the DES group were older and more likely to have hyperlipidemia and bifurcation lesions. They had smaller vessels and longer lesions than patients in the BMS group. In the adjusted cohort of patients, the DES group had significantly lower 5 years rates of MACE （19.4% vs. 31.8%, P = 0.022）, CV death （7.0% vs. 14.7%, P = 0.045）, and MI （5.4% vs. 12.4%, P = 0.049） than the BMS group. There were no significant differences in the rate of TLR （10.9% vs. 17.8%, P = 0.110） and stent thrombosis （4.7% vs. 3.9%, P = 0.758）. The rates of MACE （80.6% vs. 68.2%, P = 0.023）, CV death （93.0% vs. 85.3%, P - 0.045）, TLR （84.5% vs. 72.1%, P = 0.014）, and MI （89.9% vs. 80.6%, P = 0.029） free survival were significantly higher in the DES group than in the BMS group. When the propensity score was included as a covariate in the Cox model, the adjusted hazard ratios for the risk of CV death and M1 were 0.41 （95% confidence interval [C/l： 0.21-0.63, P = 0.029） and 0.29 （95% CI： 0.08-0.92, P = 0.037）, respectively. Conelusions： DES implantation was associated with more favorable clinical outcomes than BMS implantation for the treatment of LMCA disease even though there was no significant difference in the rate of TLR between the two groups.

One-year Outcomes in Patients with ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Caused by Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Occlusion Treated by Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Background： Very few data have been reported for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction （STEMI） caused by unprotected left main coronary artery （ULMCA） occlusion, and very little is known about the results of this subgroup of patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI）. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical features and outcomes of patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI for acute ULMCA occlusion. Methods： From January 2000 to February 2014, 372 patients with STEMI caused by ULMCA acute occlusion （ULMCA-STEMI） who underwent primary PCI at one of two centers were enrolled. The 230 patients with non-ST-segment elevation MI （NSTEMI） caused by ULMCA lesion （U LMCA-NSTEMI） who underwent emergency PCI were designated the control group. The main indexes were the major adverse cardiac events （MACEs） in-hospital, at 1 month, and at 1 year. Results： Compared to the NSTEMI patients, the patients with STEMI had significantly higher rates of Killip class≥Ⅲ （21.2% vs. 3.5%,χ^2= 36.253, P 〈 0.001 ） and cardiac arrest （8.3% vs. 3.5%, χ^2= 5.529, P = 0.019）. For both groups, the proportions of one-year cardiac death in the patients with a post-procedure thrombolysis in myocardial infarction （TIMI） flow grade〈3 were significantly higher than those in the patients with a TIMI flow grade of 3 （STEMI group： 51.7% [ 15/29] vs. 4.1% [ 14/343], P 〈 0.001 ; NSTEM I group： 33.3% [3/9] vs. 13.6% [3/221], P = 0.001; respectively]. Landmark analysis showed that the patients in STEM I group were associated with higher risks of MACE （16.7% vs. 9.1%, P 0.009） and cardiac death （5.4% vs. 1.3%, P- 0.011 ） compared with NSTEMI patients at I month. Meanwhile, in patients with ULMCA, the landmark analysis for incidences of MACE and cardiac death was similar between the STEMI and NSTEMI （all P=0.72） in the intervals of 1-12 months. However, patients who were diagnosed with STEMI or NSTEMI had no significant difference in reinfarction （all P 〉 0.05） and TVR （all P〉 0.05） in the intervals of 0-1 rnonth as well as 1 month to 1 year. The results of Cox regression analysis showed that the differences in the independent predictors for MACE included the variables of Killip class ≥ Ⅲ and intra-aortic balloon pump support for the STEMI patients and the variables of previous MI, ULMCA distal bifurcation, and 2-stent for distal ULMCA lesions for the NSTEMI patients. Conclusions： Compared to the NSTEMI patients, the patients with STEMI and ULMCA lesions still remain at a much higher risk for adverse events at I year, especially on I month. Ira successthl PCI procedure is performed, the 1-year outcomes in those patients might improve.

A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, and Placebo-Controlled Study of the Effects of Tongxinluo Capsules in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients with High On-Treatment Platelet Reactivity

Background： High platelet reactivity （HPR） during clopidogrel treatment predicts postpercutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） ischemic events strongly and independently. Tongxinluo capsules （TCs） are a traditional Chinese medicine formulation used as antiplatelet treatment. However, its efficacy against HPR is not known. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effects of TCs in acute coronary syndrome （ACS） patients with HPR. Methods： This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study prospectively analyzed 136 ACS patients with HPR who underwent PCI. The patients were enrolled from November 2013 to May 2014 and randomized to receive placebo or TCs in addition to standard dual antiplatelet therapy （DAPT） with aspirin and clopidogrel. The primary end points were the prevalence of HPR at 30 days and the mean change in P2YIz reaction units （PRUs） between baseline and 30 days. Survival curves were constructed with Kaplan-Meier estimates and compared by log-rank tests between the two groups. Results： Both groups had a significantly reduced prevalence of HPR at 30 days versus baseline, but the TC group, compared with the placebo group, had greater reduction （ 15.8% vs. 24.8%, P = 0.013）, especially among patients with one cytochrome P450 2C 19 loss of function （LOF） allele （χ2 = 2.931, P = 0.047）. The TC group also had a lower prevalence of HPR （33.3% vs. 54.2%, t - 5.284, P 0.022） and superior performance in light transmittance aggregometry and higher levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein （hsCRP）, but the composite prevalence ofischemic events did not differ significantly （χ2 = 1.587, P = 0.208）. Conclusions： In addition to standard DAPT with aspirin and clopidogrel, TCs further reduce PRU and hsCRP levels, especially in patients carrying only one LOF allele. The data suggest that TCs could be used in combination therapy for ACS patients with HPR undergoing PCI.

Short-term Rosuvastatin Treatment for the Prevention of Contrast-induced Acute Kidney Injury in Patients Receiving Moderate or High Volumes of Contrast Media： A Sub-analysis of the TRACK-D Study

Background:Current randomized trials have demonstrated the effects of short-term rosuvastatin therapy in preventing contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CIAKI).However,the consistency of these effects on patients administered different volumes of contrast media is unknown.Methods:In the TRACK-D trial,2998 patients with type 2 diabetes and concomitant chronic kidney disease (CKD) who underwent coronary/peripheral arterial angiography with or without percutaneous intervention were randomized to short-term (2 days before and 3 days after procedure) rosuvastatin therapy or standard-of-care.This prespecified analysis compared the effects of rosuvastatin versus standard therapy in patients exposed to (moderate contrast volume [MCV],200-300 ml,n =712) or (high contrast volume [HCV],≥300 ml,n =220).The primary outcome was the incidence of CIAKI.The secondary outcome was a composite of death,dialysis/hemofiltration or worsened heart failure at 30 days.Results:Rosuvastatin treatment was associated with a significant reduction in CIAKI compared with the controls (2.1％ vs.4.4％,P =0.050) in the overall cohort and in patients with MCV (1.7％ vs.4.5％,P =0.029),whereas no benefit was observed in patients with HCV (3.4％ vs.3.9％,P =0.834).The incidence of secondary outcomes was significantly lower in the rosuvastatin group compared with control group (2.7％ vs.5.3％,P =0.049) in the overall cohort,but it was similar between the patients with MCV (2.0％ vs.4.2％,P =0.081) or HCV (5.1％ vs.8.8％,P =0.273).Conclusions:Periprocedural short-term rosuvastatin treatment is effective in reducing CIAKI and adverse clinical events for patients with diabetes and CKD after their exposure to a moderate volume of contrast medium.

Value of a new post-procedural intravascular ultrasound score in predicting target vessel revascularization after coronary drug-eluting stents implantation

Objective:There is no simple or feasible post-procedural intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) score to predict major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients undergoing drug-eluting stents (DES) implantation. The aim of this study is to validate a new IVUS score for predicting MACE. Methods:A total of 295 patients (with 322 lesions) were enrolled. IVUS score was calculated in each lesion based on five IVUS morphological characteristics:inflow/outflow disease, malapposition, underexpansion, tissue protrusion, and edge dissection (iMUTE score). We assigned two points to an underexpansion and one point for each presence of other factors. Patients were divided into low score (iMUTE score<2, n=137) and high score (iMUTE score≥2, n=158) groups. Results:At one year follow-up, a trend was seen in favor of the low iMUTE score group in MACE (3.65% vs. 10.10%; P=0.052), and there was more target vessel revascularization (TVR) in the high iMUTE score group compared with low score group (6.96% vs. 1.46%; P=0.044). Low iMUTE score was an independent predictor of freedom from TVR at one year (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.1-0.8; P=0.02). Conclusions:Post-procedural IVUS iMUTE scoring was simple and feasible in clinical practice, and can provide independent prognostic value for TVR in patients undergoing DES implantation.