Outcomes following PCI in CABG candidates during the COVID ‐19 pandemic: The prospective multicentre UK‐ReVasc registry
Open Access
- 4 May 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
- Vol. 99 (2), 305-313
- https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.29702
Abstract
Objectives To describe outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients who would usually have undergone coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Background In the United Kingdom, cardiac surgery for coronary artery disease (CAD) was dramatically reduced during the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Many patients with “surgical disease” instead underwent PCI. Methods Between 1 March 2020 and 31 July 2020, 215 patients with recognized “surgical” CAD who underwent PCI were enrolled in the prospective UK‐ReVasc Registry (ReVR). 30‐day major cardiovascular event outcomes were collected. Findings in ReVR patients were directly compared to reference PCI and isolated CABG pre‐COVID‐19 data from British Cardiovascular Intervention Society (BCIS) and National Cardiac Audit Programme (NCAP) databases. Results ReVR patients had higher incidence of diabetes (34.4% vs 26.4%, P = .008), multi‐vessel disease with left main stem disease (51.4% vs 3.0%, P < .001) and left anterior descending artery involvement (94.8% vs 67.2%, P < .001) compared to BCIS data. SYNTAX Score in ReVR was high (mean 28.0). Increased use of transradial access (93.3% vs 88.6%, P = .03), intracoronary imaging (43.6% vs 14.4%, P < .001) and calcium modification (23.6% vs 3.5%, P < .001) was observed. No difference in in‐hospital mortality was demonstrated compared to PCI and CABG data (ReVR 1.4% vs BCIS 0.7%, P = .19; vs NCAP 1.0%, P = .48). Inpatient stay was half compared to CABG (3.0 vs 6.0 days). Low‐event rates in ReVR were maintained to 30‐day follow‐up. Conclusions PCI undertaken using contemporary techniques produces excellent short‐term results in patients who would be otherwise CABG candidates. Longer‐term follow‐up is essential to determine whether these outcomes are maintained over time.Keywords
This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit:
- Quantification of Incomplete Revascularization and its Association With Five-Year Mortality in the Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) Trial Validation of the Residual SYNTAX ScoreJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2013
- Strategies for Multivessel Revascularization in Patients with DiabetesThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2012
- A Prospective, Randomized Clinical Trial of Hemodynamic Support With Impella 2.5 Versus Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump in Patients Undergoing High-Risk Percutaneous Coronary InterventionJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2012
- Quantification and Impact of Untreated Coronary Artery Disease After Percutaneous Coronary InterventionJournal of Invasive Cardiology, 2012
- Standardized Bleeding Definitions for Cardiovascular Clinical TrialsJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2011
- Long-Term Outcome of a Routine Versus Selective Invasive Strategy in Patients With Non–ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient DataJournal of Invasive Cardiology, 2010
- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting for Severe Coronary Artery DiseaseThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Benefit of Early Invasive Therapy in Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Meta-Analysis of Contemporary Randomized Clinical TrialsJournal of Invasive Cardiology, 2006
- Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists CollaborationThe Lancet, 1994
- Coronary arteriography 1984–1987: A report of the registry of the society for cardiac angiography and interventions. II. An analysis of 218 deaths related to coronary arteriographyCatheterization and Cardiovascular Diagnosis, 1989