A case report: successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in unprotected left main and three-vessel coronary artery disease
Abstract
Background: Left Main Coronary Artery (LMCA) Disease is the highest-risk lesion of coronary artery disease and is related to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality compared to other types of obstructive Coronary Arterial Disease (CAD). Previously, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was the preferred method for revascularization in significant LMCA lesions; however, results from several trials comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) to CABG showed PCI was non-inferior to CABG in highly selected LMCA patients. This report was to describe the contemporary evidence for PCI to CABG in LMCA Disease.
Case Presentation: A diabetic and hypertensive 59-year-old man with stable angina pectoris and Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) Score III was referred to Saiful Anwar Hospital for elective PCI consideration. The patient was diagnosed with left main and three-vessel coronary artery disease from CCTA in 2009 and angiography in 2023, then suggested to CABG for revascularization. However, the patient refused CABG surgery and decided to perform PCI with high-risk criteria after an adequate consultation. Considering the high-risk category and reduced ejection fraction, an elective PCI was performed with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) support. Then it implanted 2 DES at distal-LM until distal-LCx. In the following procedure, the patient also implanted 1 DES at mid-distal RCA and was discharged with significant improvement in his quality of life.
Conclusion: In selected left main and three-vessel coronary artery disease, PCI is successfully improves the patient's quality of lifeKeywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Abdulrahman Almoghairi, et al. Left Main Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization. US Cardiology Review. 2023; 17: e09. https://doi.org/10.15420/usc.2022.24.
Stone, G. W., et al. Five-Year Outcomes after PCI or CABG for Left Main Coronary Disease. New England Journal of Medicine. 2019; 381(19), 1820–1830. doi:10.1056/nejmoa1909406
McArdle H, et al. Emergency coronary stenting of unprotected critical left main coronary artery stenosis in acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. Heart. 2003; 89(9): 1-3. doi:10.1136/heart.89.9.e24.
Patel N, et al. Outcomes after emergency percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with unprotected left main stem occlusion: The BCIS national audit of percutaneous coronary intervention 6-year experience. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014; 7(9): 969-980. doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2014.04.011.
Kim, W., Paet al. Risk Factors Associated with Hemodynamic Instability during Stent Implantation in Unprotected Left Main Lesions without Routine IABP: Identification of the High-Risk Patients. Korean Circulation Journal. 2007; 37(3), 108. doi:10.4070/kcj.2007.37.3.108.
Shiomi, H., et al. Comparison of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease – 5-Year Outcome From CREDO-Kyoto PCI/CABG Registry Cohort-2 –. Circulation Journal, 2015; 79(6), 1282–1289. doi:10.1253/circj.cj-15-0034
Yi Hua Low, Gerald Gui Ren Sng, Samuel Ji Quan Koh, Jonathan Jiunn Liang Yap, Yee How Lau, Danielle Yi Ting Tan, Yilin Jiang, Kenny Yoong Kong Sin, Khung Keong Yeo, Reasons for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Rejection: Patients’ and Surgeons’ Perspective, Journal of Asian Pacific Society of Cardiology 2023;2:e12.
Morice MC, et al. Outcomes in patients with de novo left main disease treated with either percutaneous coronary intervention using paclitaxel-eluting stents or coronary artery bypass graft treatment in the Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) trial. Circulation. 2010;121:2645e2653.
Park SJ, et al. Randomized trial of stents versus bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2011; 364: 1718e1727.
Seung KB, at al. Stents versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for left main coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2008; 358: 1781e1792.
Neumann FJ, et al. ESC/EACTS guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019; 40:87–165. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehy394.
Kumar N, P., et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention in unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: Mid-term outcomes of a single-center observational study. Indian Heart Journal. 2022; 74(2), 96–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2021.12.014.
Chen, Z.-W., et al. Rapid predictors for the occurrence of reduced left ventricular ejection fraction between LAD and non-LAD related ST-elevation myocardial infarction. BMC Cardiovascular Disorders. 2016; 16(1). doi:10.1186/s12872-015-0178-y
Curtis, J. P., et al. Use and Effectiveness of Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumps Among Patients Undergoing High Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the National Cardiovascular Data Registry. Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes. 2011; 5(1), 21–30. doi:10.1161/circoutcomes.110.960385.
Lawton, et al. ACC/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Coronary Artery Revascularization: A Report of the American College of Cardiology / American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2022;145:e18–e114. doi:10.1161/CIR.0000000000001038
Mohamed O. Mohamed, et al. Impact of Intracoronary Imaging‐Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Procedural Outcomes Among Complex Patient Groups. J Am Heart Assoc. 2022;11:e026500. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.122.026500
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.hsj.2024.005.04.14
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Cik Kahadi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.