King, Spencer B.

Background— Little is known about what treatments patients receive after being diagnosed with stable coronary artery disease or what the comparative outcomes are for routine medical treatment (RMT) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with RMT for patients in a setting apart from randomized controlled trials. Methods and Results— Patients with stable coronary artery disease undergoing cardiac catheterization in New York State between 2003 and 2008 were followed up to determine the treatment they received. Patients receiving RMT and patients receiving PCI with RMT were propensity matched through the use of 20 factors that could have a bearing on outcomes. The resulting cohort of 933 matched pairs was used to compare mortality/myocardial infarction (MI), mortality, MI, and subsequent revascularization rates. A total of 89% of all patients underwent PCI with RMT. PCI/RMT patients had significantly lower adverse outcome rates at 4 years for mortality/MI (16.5% versus 21.2%; P =0.003), mortality (10.2% versus 14.5%; P =0.02), MI (8.0% versus 11.3%; P =0.007), and subsequent revascularization (24.1% versus 29.1%; P =0.005). Adjusted RMT versus (PCI with RMT) hazard ratios were 1.49 (95% confidence interval, 1.16–1.93) for mortality/MI and 1.46 (95% confidence interval, 1.08–1.97) for mortality. There were no differences for patients ≤65 years of age or for patients with single-vessel disease. Conclusions— Most patients with stable coronary artery disease in New York undergoing catheterization between 2003 and 2008 received PCI. Patients who received PCI experienced lower mortality, mortality/MI, and revascularization rates. The reasons for this finding need to be better understood, including the possible role of low medication adherence rates that have been found in other studies.

Background— The impact of incomplete revascularization (IR) on adverse outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention remains inconclusive, and few studies have examined mortality during follow-ups longer than 5 years. The objective of this study is to test the hypothesis that IR is associated with higher risk of long-term (8-year) mortality after stenting for multivessel coronary disease. Methods and Results— A total of 13 016 patients with multivessel disease who had undergone stenting procedures with bare metal stents in 1999 to 2000 were identified in the New York State's Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Reporting System. A logistic regression model was fit to predict the probability of achieving complete revascularization (CR) in these patients using baseline risk factors; then, the CR patients were matched to the IR patients with similar likelihoods of achieving CR. Each patient's vital status was followed through 2007 using the National Death Index, and the difference in long-term mortality between IR and CR was compared. It was found that CR was achieved in 29.2% (3803) of the patients. For the 3803 pair-matched patients, the respective 8-year survival rates were 80.8% and 78.5% for CR and IR ( P =0.04), respectively. The risk of death was marginally significantly higher for IR (hazard ratio=1.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.01–1.26, P =0.04). The 95% bootstrap confidence interval for the hazard ratio was 0.98 to 1.32. Conclusions— IR may be associated with higher risk of long-term mortality after stenting with BMS in patients with multivessel disease. More prospective studies are needed to further test this association.

Background— The benefit of primary percutaneous coronary interventions (P-PCI) for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been well documented. However, controversy still exists as to whether PCI should be expanded to hospitals without coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Methods and Results— Patients who were discharged after PCI for STEMI between January 1, 2003, and December 12, 2006, in P-PCI centers (hospitals with no coronary artery bypass graft surgery, and PCI only for patients with STEMI) were propensity matched with patients in full service centers, and mortality and subsequent revascularization rates were compared. For patients undergoing PCI, there were no differences for in-hospital/30-day mortality (2.3% for P-PCI centers versus 1.9% for full service centers [ P =0.40]), emergency coronary artery bypass graft surgery immediately after PCI (0.06% versus 0.35%, P =0.06), 3-year mortality (7.1% versus 5.9%, P =0.07), or 3-year subsequent revascularization (23.8% versus 21.5%, P =0.52). P-PCI centers had a lower same/next day coronary artery bypass graft rate (0.23% versus 0.69%, P =0.046) and higher repeat target vessel PCI rates (12.1% versus 9.0%, P =0.003). For patients with STEMI who did not undergo PCI, P-PCI centers had higher in-hospital mortality (28.5% versus 22.3%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.75). Conclusions— No differences between P-PCI centers and full service centers were found in in-hospital/30-day mortality, the need for emergency surgery, 3-year mortality or subsequent revascularization, but P-PCI centers had higher repeat target vessel PCI rates and higher mortality rates for patients who did not undergo PCI. P-PCI centers should be monitored closely, including the monitoring of patients with STEMI who did not undergo PCI.

Background— Few studies have compared medium-term outcomes for drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare metal stents, and most are relatively small randomized controlled trials. Furthermore, since the introduction of DES, there has been increased use and duration of use of clopidogrel, statins, and other evidence-based therapies. The purpose of the present study was to compare outcomes for patients who underwent stenting in the eras before and after the introduction of DES. Methods and Results— New York state patients undergoing stenting in all nonfederal hospitals in the state were studied. Patients were excluded if they had a previous revascularization. Risk factors that were significant predictors of adverse outcomes were used to adjust adverse outcome rates. The study included 11 436 patients who received stents between October 1, 2002, and March 31, 2003, and 12 926 patients who underwent stenting between October 1, 2003, and March 31, 2004. Death rates, the combined end point of death and myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal MI requiring readmission, target vessel revascularization, and target lesion revascularization were compared at 2 years. Patients in the DES era had significantly better risk-adjusted outcomes for death/MI (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.83 to 0.97), 9.9% versus 10.8%; nonfatal MI requiring readmission (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.76 to 0.97); target vessel revascularization (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.56 to 0.64), 11.2% versus 17.9%; and target lesion revascularization (hazard ratio, 0.55; 95% confidence interval, 0.51 to 0.59), 8.4% versus 14.7%. Conclusions— Patients in the DES era experienced lower rates of death/MI, nonfatal MI, target vessel revascularization, and target lesion revascularization, but there were no differences in the rates of death. These improvements are likely a result of increased use of clopidogrel, statins, and dual antiplatelet therapy, in addition to the introduction of DES.

Background— The importance of completeness of revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel disease is unclear in that there is little information on the impact of incomplete revascularization outside of randomized trials. The objective of this study is to compare long-term mortality and subsequent revascularization for percutaneous coronary intervention patients receiving stents who were completely revascularized (CR) with those who were incompletely revascularized (IR). Methods and Results— Patients from New York State’s Percutaneous Coronary Interventions Reporting System were subdivided into patients who were CR and IR. Then subsets of IR patients were contrasted with CR patients. Differences in long-term survival and subsequent revascularization for CR and IR patients were compared after adjustment for differences in preprocedural risk. A total of 68.9% of all stent patients with multivessel disease who were studied were IR, and 30.1% of all patients had total occlusions and/or ≥2 IR vessels. At baseline, the following patients were at higher risk: those who were older and those with more comorbid conditions, worse ejection fraction, and more renal disease and stroke. After adjustment for these baseline differences, IR patients were significantly more likely to die at any time (adjusted hazard ratio=1.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.30) than CR patients. IR patients with total occlusions and a total of ≥2 IR vessels were at the highest risk compared with CR patients (hazard ratio=1.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.12 to 1.66). Conclusions— IR with stenting is associated with an adverse impact on long-term mortality, and consideration should be given to either achieving CR, opting for surgery, or monitoring percutaneous coronary intervention patients with IR more closely after discharge.

Background— Most studies that are the basis of recommended volume thresholds for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) predate the routine use of stent placement. Methods and Results— Data from New York’s Percutaneous Coronary Interventions Reporting System in 1998 to 2000 (n=107 713) were used to examine the impact of annual hospital volume and annual operator volume on in-hospital mortality, same-day coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, and same-stay CABG surgery after adjustment for differences in patients’ severity of illness. For a hospital-volume threshold of 400, the odds ratios for low-volume hospitals versus high-volume hospitals were 1.98 (95% CI, 1.17, 3.35) for in-hospital mortality, 2.07 (95% CI, 1.36, 3.15) for same-day CABG surgery, and 1.51 (95% CI, 1.03, 2.21) for same-stay CABG surgery. For an operator-volume threshold of 75, the odds ratios for low-volume versus high-volume operators were 1.65 (95% CI, 1.05, 2.60) for same-day CABG surgery and 1.55 (95% CI, 1.10, 2.18) for same-stay CABG surgery. Operator volume was not significantly associated with mortality. Also, for hospital volumes below 400 and operator volumes below 75, the respective odds of mortality, same-day CABG surgery, and same-stay CABG surgery were 5.92, 4.02, and 3.92 times the odds for hospital volumes of 400 or higher and operator volumes of 75 or higher. Conclusions— Higher-volume operators and hospitals continue to experience lower risk-adjusted PCI outcome rates.

Background— Restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a major problem affecting 15% to 30% of patients after stent placement. No oral agent has shown a beneficial effect on restenosis or on associated major adverse cardiovascular events. In limited trials, the oral agent tranilast has been shown to decrease the frequency of angiographic restenosis after PCI. Methods and Results— In this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of tranilast (300 and 450 mg BID for 1 or 3 months), 11 484 patients were enrolled. Enrollment and drug were initiated within 4 hours after successful PCI of at least 1 vessel. The primary end point was the first occurrence of death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization within 9 months and was 15.8% in the placebo group and 15.5% to 16.1% in the tranilast groups ( P =0.77 to 0.81). Myocardial infarction was the only component of major adverse cardiovascular events to show some evidence of a reduction with tranilast (450 mg BID for 3 months): 1.1% versus 1.8% with placebo ( P =0.061 for intent-to-treat population). The primary reason for not completing treatment was ≥1 hepatic laboratory test abnormality (11.4% versus 0.2% with placebo, P <0.01). In the angiographic substudy composed of 2018 patients, minimal lumen diameter (MLD) was measured by quantitative coronary angiography. At follow-up, MLD was 1.76±0.77 mm in the placebo group, which was not different from MLD in the tranilast groups (1.72 to 1.78±0.76 to 80 mm, P =0.49 to 0.89). In a subset of these patients (n=1107), intravascular ultrasound was performed at follow-up. Plaque volume was not different between the placebo and tranilast groups (39.3 versus 37.5 to 46.1 mm 3 , respectively; P =0.16 to 0.72). Conclusions— Tranilast does not improve the quantitative measures of restenosis (angiographic and intravascular ultrasound) or its clinical sequelae.