Advertisement

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Stable Ischemic Heart Disease

  • William S. Weintraub
  • Sandra Weiss
  • Abdul Latif Bikak
Chapter

Abstract

Coronary angiography and revascularization began in the 1960s and has evolved dramatically into a robust platform for not only diagnosis of coronary disease but also complex intervention. The phenomenal number of procedures, over a million by the mid-2000s in the United States alone, has helped improve operator expertise. This coupled with advances in equipment, specifically in stent technology, has made percutaneous intervention an increasingly preferred modality in various clinical scenarios. With this, the world saw ever-increasing revascularization of coronary stenoses in patients ranging from those with asymptomatic lesions to those suffering an acute myocardial infarction. However, even though coronary intervention through both percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting have greatly improved outcomes in the setting of acute coronary syndrome, the same has not been systematically true for stable ischemic heart disease.

Keywords

Acute myocardial infarction Percutaneous coronary intervention Acute coronary syndrome Stable ischemic heart disease Optimal medical therapy Coronary artery bypass grafting Revascularization 

References

  1. 1.
    Rosamond W, Flegal K, Friday G, et al. Heart disease and stroke statistics-2007 update. Circulation. 2007;115:e69–e171.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention—summary article. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (ACC/AHA/SCAI writing committee to update the 2001 guidelines for percutaneous coronary intervention). Circulation. 2006;113:156–75.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Varnauskas E. Twelve-year follow-up of survival in the randomized European Coronary Surgery Study. N Engl J Med. 1988;319(6):332–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Veterans Administration Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Cooperative Study Group. Eleven-year survival in the veterans administration randomized trial of coronary bypass surgery for stable angina. N Engl J Med. 1984;311(21):1333–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    The VA Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Cooperative Study Group. Eighteen-year survival in the veterans affairs cooperative study of coronary artery bypasss surgery for stable angina. Circulation. 1992;86(1):121–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Loop FD, Lytle BW, Cosgrove DM, et al. Influence of the internal-mammary-artery graft on 10-year survival and other cardiac events. N Engl J Med. 1986;314(1):1–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Coronary artery surgery study (CASS): a randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Comparability of entry characteristics and survival in randomized patients and nonrandomized patients meeting randomization criteria. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1984;3(1):114–28.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yusuf S, Zucker D, Passamani E, et al. 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 Collaboration. Lancet. 1994;344:563–70.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Coronary angioplasty versus medical therapy for angina: the second Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA-2) trial. RITA-2 trial participants. Lancet. 1997;350(9076):461–8.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pocock SJ, Henderson RA, Rickards AF, Hampton JR, et al. Meta-analysis of randomised trials comparing coronary angioplasty with bypass surgery. Lancet. 1995;346(8984):1184–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Roger VL, Go AS, Lloyd-Jones DM, et al. Executive summary: heart diseaseand stroke statistics-2011 update: a report from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2011;123(4):459–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Katritsis DG, Ioannidis JP. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus conservativetherapy in nonacute coronary artery disease: a meta analysis. Circulation. 2005;111:2906–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Boden WE, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(15):1503–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chaitman BR, Rosen AD, Williams DO, et al. Myocardial infarction and cardiac mortality in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) randomized trial. Circulation. 1997;96(7):2162–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sobel BE, Frye R, Detre KM, et al. Burgeoning dilemmas in the management of diabetes and cardiovascular disease: rationale for the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation 2 diabetes (BARI 2D) trial. Circulation. 2003;107(4):636–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Farkouh ME, Domanski M, Sleeper LA, et al. Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:2375–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Park SJ, Ahn JM, Kim YH, et al. Trial of everolimus-eluting stents or bypass surgery for coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1204–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Farooq V, et al. Quantification of incomplete revacularization and its association with five year mortality in the synergy between percutaneous cornary intervention with taxus and cardiac surgery (SYNTAX) trial validation of residual SYNTAX score. Circulation. 2013;128:141–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Xu B, Yang YJ, Han YL, et al. Validation of residual SYNTAX score with second-generation drug-eluting stents: one-year results from the prospective multicentre SEEDS study. EuroIntervention. 2014;10(1):65–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Garcia S, et al. Outcomse after complete versus incomplete revascularization of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of 89, 883 patients enrolled in randomized clinical trials and obervational studies. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;62:1421–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Aggarwal V, et al. Clinical outcomes based on completeness of revascularisation in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis of multivessel coronary artery disease studies. EuroIntervention. 2012;7:1095–102.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Escaned J, Banning A, Farooq V, et al. Rationale and design of the SYNTAX II trial evaluating the short to long-term outcomes of state-of-the-art percutaneous coronary revascularisation in patients with de novo three-vessel disease. EuroIntervention. 2016;12(2):e224–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shaw LJ, Berman DS, Maron DJ, et al. Optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention to reduce ischemic burden: results from the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) trial nuclear substudy. Circulation. 2008;117(10):1283–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tonino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, et al. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(3):213–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sechtem U. Is FAME 2 a breakthrough for PCI in stable coronary disease? Clin Res Cardiol. 2015;104(4):283–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Al-Lamee R, Thompson D, Dehbi H-M, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention in stable angina (ORBITA): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2018;391:31–40.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Al-Lamee R, Howard J, Shun-Shin M, et al. Fractional flow reserve and instantaneous wave-free ratio as predictors of the placebo-controlled response to percutaneous coronary intervention in stable single vessel coronary artery disease: the physiology-stratified analysis of ORBITA. Circulation. 2018. doi: https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.033801 [Epub ahead of print].
  28. 28.
    Kirtane AJ. ORBITA: bringing some oxygen back to pci in stable ischemic heart disease? Circulation. CIRCULATIONAHA.118.035331.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • William S. Weintraub
    • 1
  • Sandra Weiss
    • 1
  • Abdul Latif Bikak
    • 1
  1. 1.The Center for Heart and Vascular Health, Christiana Care Health SystemNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations