Impact of Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization of Severe Coronary Lesions on Secondary Branches

AbstractIntroduction and objectivesTo analyze the percutaneous revascularization strategy for severe lesions in the secondary branches (SB) (diameter ≥ 2 mm) of major epicardial arteries compared with conservative treatment. MethodsThis study analyzed patients with severe SB lesions who underwent pe...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Revista española de cardiología (English ed.) Vol. 72; no. 6; pp. 456 - 465
Main Authors: Cano-García, Macarena, Millán-Gómez, Mercedes, Sánchez-González, Carlos, Alonso-Briales, Juan H, Muñoz-Jiménez, Luz D, Carrasco-Chinchilla, Fernando, Domínguez-Franco, Antonio, Muñoz-García, Antonio J, Bullones-Ramírez, Juan A, Álvarez-Rubiera, Jesús M, de Mora-Martín, Manuel, de Teresa-Galván, Eduardo, Hernández-García, José M, Urbano-Carrillo, Cristóbal A, Jiménez-Navarro, Manuel F
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Spain 01-06-2019
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:AbstractIntroduction and objectivesTo analyze the percutaneous revascularization strategy for severe lesions in the secondary branches (SB) (diameter ≥ 2 mm) of major epicardial arteries compared with conservative treatment. MethodsThis study analyzed patients with severe SB lesions who underwent percutaneous revascularization treatment compared with patients who received pharmacological treatment. The study examined the percentage of branch-related events (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction attributable to SB, or the need for revascularization of the SB).ResultsWe analyzed 679 SB lesions (662 patients). After a mean follow-up of 22.2 ± 10.5 months, there were no significant differences between the 2 treatment groups regarding the percentage of death from cardiovascular causes (1.7% vs 0.4%; P= .14), nonfatal acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (1.7% vs 1.7%; P= .96), the need for SB revascularization (4.1% vs 5.4%; P= .45) or in the total percentage of events (5.1% vs 6.3%; P= .54). The variables showing an association with event occurrence on multivariate analysis were diabetes (SHR, 2.87; 95%CI, 1.37-5.47; P= .004), prior AMI (SHR, 3.54; 95%CI, 1.77-7.30; P< .0001), SB reference diameter (SHR, 0.16; 95%CI, 0.03-0.97; P= .047), and lesion length (SHR, 3.77; 95%CI, 1.03-1.13; P< .0001). These results remained the same after the propensity score analysis. ConclusionsThe percentage of SB-related events during follow-up is low, with no significant differences between the 2 treatment strategies. The variables associated with event occurrence in the multivariate analysis were the presence of diabetes mellitus, prior AMI, and greater lesion length.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1885-5857
1885-5857
DOI:10.1016/j.rec.2018.04.011