Impact of Coronary Calcification on Complete Revascularization in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
William Camilleri, Hala Kakar, Jacob J Elscot, Eric Boersma, Nicolas M Van Mieghem, Roberto Diletti, Joost Daemen, Elena Ntantou, Jeroen Wilschut, Rutger Jan Nuis, Wijnand K Den Dekker
{"title":"Impact of Coronary Calcification on Complete Revascularization in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease.","authors":"William Camilleri, Hala Kakar, Jacob J Elscot, Eric Boersma, Nicolas M Van Mieghem, Roberto Diletti, Joost Daemen, Elena Ntantou, Jeroen Wilschut, Rutger Jan Nuis, Wijnand K Den Dekker","doi":"10.1002/ccd.31495","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Coronary calcification is a well-known marker of atherosclerotic plaque burden and a determinant of stent under expansion with unfavorable long-term outcomes.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>This sub study of the randomized BIOVASC trial aimed to compare immediate complete revascularization (ICR) and staged complete revascularization (SCR) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and multi vessel disease (MVD), stratified by calcification of the culprit lesion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The primary endpoint consisted of a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, unplanned ischemia driven revascularization (UIDR) and cerebrovascular events at 2 year follow-up. Secondary endpoints included the individual components of the primary composite and major bleedings. We used cox regression models to relate study endpoints with randomized treatment stratified by calcification of the culprit lesion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The BIOVASC trial enrolled 103 patients with a moderately or severely calcified culprit lesion. The composite primary outcome occurred in 8/57 (14.3%) versus 9/46 (19.7%) patients randomized to ICR and SCR (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66% and 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-1.71, p = 0.39). In the non-calcified culprit lesions, there were 83 events in the ICR (12.4%) and 82 events in the SCR (11.9%) (HR 1.01 [0.75-1.37], p = 0.94, P-interaction = 0.42). There was no evidence of a differential effect of ICR vs. SCR on the primary endpoint in relation to culprit lesion calcification (P-interaction = 0.42).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No differential treatment effect of ICR versus SCR was observed when comparing the primary composite outcome between calcified and non-calcified culprit lesion.</p>","PeriodicalId":9650,"journal":{"name":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31495","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Coronary calcification is a well-known marker of atherosclerotic plaque burden and a determinant of stent under expansion with unfavorable long-term outcomes.

Aims: This sub study of the randomized BIOVASC trial aimed to compare immediate complete revascularization (ICR) and staged complete revascularization (SCR) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and multi vessel disease (MVD), stratified by calcification of the culprit lesion.

Methods: The primary endpoint consisted of a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, unplanned ischemia driven revascularization (UIDR) and cerebrovascular events at 2 year follow-up. Secondary endpoints included the individual components of the primary composite and major bleedings. We used cox regression models to relate study endpoints with randomized treatment stratified by calcification of the culprit lesion.

Results: The BIOVASC trial enrolled 103 patients with a moderately or severely calcified culprit lesion. The composite primary outcome occurred in 8/57 (14.3%) versus 9/46 (19.7%) patients randomized to ICR and SCR (hazard ratio [HR] 0.66% and 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-1.71, p = 0.39). In the non-calcified culprit lesions, there were 83 events in the ICR (12.4%) and 82 events in the SCR (11.9%) (HR 1.01 [0.75-1.37], p = 0.94, P-interaction = 0.42). There was no evidence of a differential effect of ICR vs. SCR on the primary endpoint in relation to culprit lesion calcification (P-interaction = 0.42).

Conclusion: No differential treatment effect of ICR versus SCR was observed when comparing the primary composite outcome between calcified and non-calcified culprit lesion.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
8.70%
发文量
419
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions is an international journal covering the broad field of cardiovascular diseases. Subject material includes basic and clinical information that is derived from or related to invasive and interventional coronary or peripheral vascular techniques. The journal focuses on material that will be of immediate practical value to physicians providing patient care in the clinical laboratory setting. To accomplish this, the journal publishes Preliminary Reports and Work In Progress articles that complement the traditional Original Studies, Case Reports, and Comprehensive Reviews. Perspective and insight concerning controversial subjects and evolving technologies are provided regularly through Editorial Commentaries furnished by members of the Editorial Board and other experts. Articles are subject to double-blind peer review and complete editorial evaluation prior to any decision regarding acceptability.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信