Short- and long-term outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions of high-risk vs. low-risk lesions performed at a hospital without an on-site cardiac surgery unit

Aim    Widespread utilization of technology has led to the construction of a growing number of facilities with coronary angiography units and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) capability. Some of these centers do not have cardiovascular surgery (CVS) on site. Studies regarding the efficacy and safety of PCIs performed at these hospitals have been conducted. However, to date, high-risk procedures in this context have not been evaluated. The present study compares the outcomes of PCI procedures performed on high- and low-risk lesions groups in a center without CVS back-up.
Material and methods    A total of 999 patients treated with PCI with diagnoses other than ST elevation myocardial infarction were included in this study. Patients with SYNTAX scores 22 or higher, bifurcation lesions, chronic total occlusions, left main coronary artery lesions and saphenous graft lesions were classified as a high-risk group. In contrast, patients with SYNTAX scores lower than 22 were included in the low-risk group. Coronary lesions were classified as Type-A, B, and C. The 30‑day major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and 1‑year target vessel revascularization (TVR) rates were compared.
Results    There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the rates of MACE (2 (0.9 %) vs 5 (0.6 %); p=0.64) and TVR (9 (4.2 %) vs 25 (3.2 %); p=0.52). Analysis regarding the lesion type also revealed no significant difference between the MACE and TVR rates (p=0.56 and p=0.43, respectively).
Conclusions    The findings in this study demonstrated that, similar to low-risk procedures, complex and high-risk coronary interventions can safely and effectively be conducted in hospitals without a CVS unit.

1. Ibanez B, James S, Agewall S, Antunes MJ, Bucciarelli-Ducci C, Bueno H et al. 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). European Heart Journal. 2018;39(2):119– 77. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx393

2. Levine GN, Bates ER, Bittl JA, Brindis RG, Fihn SD, Fleisher LA et al. 2016 ACC/AHA Guideline Focused Update on Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines: An Update of the 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, 2011 ACCF/AHA Guideline for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery, 2012 ACC/AHA/ACP/ AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease, 2013 ACCF/ AHA Guideline for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction, 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Non–ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes, and 2014 ACC/AHA Guideline on Perioperative Cardiovascular Evaluation and Management of Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery. Circulation. 2016;134(10):e123–55. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000404

3. Neumann F-J, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, Alfonso F, Banning AP, Benedetto U et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. European Heart Journal. 2019;40(2):87–165. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394

4. Dehmer GJ, Blankenship JC, Cilingiroglu M, Dwyer JG, Feldman DN, Gardner TJ et al. SCAI/ACC/AHA Expert Consensus Document: 2014 Update on Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Without OnSite Surgical Backup. Circulation. 2014;129(24):2610–26. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000037

5. Levine GN, Bates ER, Blankenship JC, Bailey SR, Bittl JA, Cercek B et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. Circulation. 2011;124(23):2574–609. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e31823a5596

6. Jacobs AK, Normand S-LT, Massaro JM, Cutlip DE, Carrozza JP, Marks AD et al. Nonemergency PCI at Hospitals with or without On-Site Cardiac Surgery. New England Journal of Medicine. 2013;368(16):1498–508. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1300610

7. Aversano T, Lemmon CC, Liu L. Outcomes of PCI at Hospitals with or without On-Site Cardiac Surgery. New England Journal of Medicine. 2012;366(19):1792–802. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1114540

8. Thuijs DJFM, Kappetein AP, Serruys PW, Mohr F-W, Morice M-C, Mack MJ et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial. The Lancet. 2019;394(10206):1325–34. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31997-X

9. Ikeno F, Brooks MM, Nakagawa K, Kim M-K, Kaneda H, Mitsutake Y et al. SYNTAX Score and Long-Term : The BARI-2D Trial. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2017;69(4):395–403. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.10.067

10. Ryan TJ, Bauman WB, Kennedy JW, Kereiakes DJ, King SB, McCallister BD et al. Guidelines for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. A report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Task Force on Assessment of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Cardiovascular Procedures (Committee on Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty). Circulation. 1993;88(6):2987–3007. DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.88.6.2987

11. Steinberg DH, Mishra S, Javaid A, Slottow TLP, Buch AN, Roy P et al. Comparison of Effectiveness of Bare Metal Stents Versus DrugEluting Stents in Large (≥3.5 mm) Coronary Arteries. The American Journal of Cardiology. 2007;99(5):599–602. DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.09.105

12. Changal KH, Mir T, Khan S, Nazir S, Elzanatey A, Meenakshisundaram C et al. Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Bare-Metal Stents in Large Coronary Artery Revascularization: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Cardiovascular Revascularization Medicine. 2021;23:42–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.carrev.2020.07.018