Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Left Main Disease in High Bleeding Risk: Outcomes from a Subanalysis of the Delta 2 Registry.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Giulia Botti, Francesco Federico, Emanuele Meliga, Joost Daemen, Fabrizio D'Ascenzo, Davide Capodanno, Nicolas Dumonteil, Didier Tchetche, Nicolas M Van Mieghem, Sunao Nakamura, Philippe Garot, Andrejs Erglis, Ciro Vella, Corrado Tamburino, Marie Claude Morice, Roxana Mehran, Matteo Montorfano, Alaide Chieffo
{"title":"Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Left Main Disease in High Bleeding Risk: Outcomes from a Subanalysis of the Delta 2 Registry.","authors":"Giulia Botti, Francesco Federico, Emanuele Meliga, Joost Daemen, Fabrizio D'Ascenzo, Davide Capodanno, Nicolas Dumonteil, Didier Tchetche, Nicolas M Van Mieghem, Sunao Nakamura, Philippe Garot, Andrejs Erglis, Ciro Vella, Corrado Tamburino, Marie Claude Morice, Roxana Mehran, Matteo Montorfano, Alaide Chieffo","doi":"10.3390/jcdd12050179","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>High bleeding risk (HBR) is a challenge in patients with complex coronary lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study investigates HBR in a wide and comprehensive cohort of patients undergoing left main (LM) PCI and reports in-hospital and follow-up outcomes. The analysis was performed on data from the DELTA (Drug Eluting Stent for Left Main Coronary Artery) 2 Registry, which included patients who underwent LM PCI at 19 centres worldwide. The patients were defined to be at HBR if ≥1 major criterion or ≥2 minor criteria from the Academic Research Consortium (ARC) were met. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI) or cerebrovascular accident (CVA) at median follow-up. A total of 1531 patients were included, and the rate of HBR was 65.8%. Besides the different clinical characteristics embedded in the ARC definition, HBR patients had higher prevalence of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) at presentation (49.2% vs. 26.8%, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and experienced higher in-hospital mortality (1.8% vs. 0.2%; <i>p</i> = 0.029) and MI (5.0% vs. 2.1%, <i>p</i> = 0.009). The median follow-up was 473 days. The rate of the primary endpoint was more than three times higher in HBR patients (20.8% vs. 6.1%; HR 3.3; 95%CI: 2.2-4.8) and driven by all-cause death at multivariate regression analysis. Conversely, no significant difference in target lesion revascularization and probable or defined stent thrombosis was reported. HBR patients undergoing LM PCI experienced higher rates of all-cause death at follow-up; similar outcomes were also reported in-hospital.</p>","PeriodicalId":15197,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease","volume":"12 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12112215/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd12050179","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

High bleeding risk (HBR) is a challenge in patients with complex coronary lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study investigates HBR in a wide and comprehensive cohort of patients undergoing left main (LM) PCI and reports in-hospital and follow-up outcomes. The analysis was performed on data from the DELTA (Drug Eluting Stent for Left Main Coronary Artery) 2 Registry, which included patients who underwent LM PCI at 19 centres worldwide. The patients were defined to be at HBR if ≥1 major criterion or ≥2 minor criteria from the Academic Research Consortium (ARC) were met. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI) or cerebrovascular accident (CVA) at median follow-up. A total of 1531 patients were included, and the rate of HBR was 65.8%. Besides the different clinical characteristics embedded in the ARC definition, HBR patients had higher prevalence of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) at presentation (49.2% vs. 26.8%, p < 0.001) and experienced higher in-hospital mortality (1.8% vs. 0.2%; p = 0.029) and MI (5.0% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.009). The median follow-up was 473 days. The rate of the primary endpoint was more than three times higher in HBR patients (20.8% vs. 6.1%; HR 3.3; 95%CI: 2.2-4.8) and driven by all-cause death at multivariate regression analysis. Conversely, no significant difference in target lesion revascularization and probable or defined stent thrombosis was reported. HBR patients undergoing LM PCI experienced higher rates of all-cause death at follow-up; similar outcomes were also reported in-hospital.

经皮冠状动脉介入治疗左主干疾病高危出血:来自Delta 2登记亚分析的结果
高出血风险(HBR)是复杂冠状动脉病变患者接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的一个挑战。本研究在广泛而全面的左主干PCI患者队列中调查HBR,并报告住院和随访结果。分析数据来自DELTA(左主干冠状动脉药物洗脱支架)登记,其中包括在全球19个中心接受llm PCI的患者。如果满足学术研究联盟(ARC)的≥1个主要标准或≥2个次要标准,则将患者定义为HBR。主要终点是中位随访时全因死亡、心肌梗死(MI)或脑血管意外(CVA)的复合。共纳入1531例患者,HBR发生率为65.8%。除了ARC定义中包含的不同临床特征外,HBR患者在就诊时急性冠脉综合征(ACS)患病率更高(49.2%比26.8%,p < 0.001),住院死亡率更高(1.8%比0.2%;p = 0.029)和MI (5.0% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.009)。中位随访时间为473天。HBR患者的主要终点率高出3倍多(20.8% vs 6.1%;人力资源3.3;95%CI: 2.2-4.8),多因素回归分析显示由全因死亡驱动。相反,靶病变血运重建和可能或明确的支架血栓形成无显著差异。接受LM PCI的HBR患者在随访中出现更高的全因死亡率;医院也报告了类似的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease
Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
381
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信