Aims The aim of this article was to compare rates of all-cause death at 10 years following coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with or without diabetes. Methods and results The SYNTAXES study evaluated up to 10-year survival of 1800 patients with three-vessel disease (3VD) and/or left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) randomized to receive either PCI or CABG in the SYNTAX trial. Ten-year all-cause death according to diabetic status and revascularization strategy was examined. In diabetics (n = 452), the risk of mortality was numerically higher with PCI compared with CABG at 5 years [19.6% vs. 13.3%, hazard ratio (HR): 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.96, 2.43, P = 0.075], with the opposite seen between 5 and 10 years (PCI vs. CABG: 20.8% vs. 24.4%, HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.52, 1.27, P = 0.366). Irrespective of diabetic status, there was no significant difference in all-cause death at 10 years between patients receiving PCI or CABG, the absolute treatment difference was 1.9% in diabetics (PCI vs. CABG: 36.4% vs. 34.5%, difference: 1.9%, 95% CI: −7.6%, 11.1%, P = 0.551). Among insulin-treated patients (n = 182), all-cause death at 10 years was numerically higher with PCI (47.9% vs. 39.6%, difference: 8.2%, 95% CI: −6.5%, 22.5%, P = 0.227). Conclusions The treatment effects of PCI vs. CABG on all-cause death at 10 years in patients with 3VD and/or LMCAD were similar irrespective of the presence of diabetes. There may, however, be a survival benefit with CABG in patients with insulin-treated diabetes. The association between revascularization strategy and very long-term ischaemic and safety outcomes for patients with diabetes needs further investigation in dedicated trials. Trial registration SYNTAX: ClinicalTrials.gov reference: NCT00114972 and SYNTAX Extended Survival: ClinicalTrials.gov reference: NCT03417050.

No abstract

No abstract

Objectives To compare the predictive performances of the prewiring, postwiring MI‐SYNTAX scores, prewiring, and postwiring Updated Logistic Clinical SYNTAX score (LCSS) for 2‐year all‐cause mortality post percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in ST‐elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. Background In patients with STEMI and undergoing primary PCI, coronary stenosis(es) distal to the culprit lesion is often observed after the restoration of coronary flow. To address comprehensively the complex coronary anatomy in these patients, prewiring and postwiring MI‐SYNTAX scores have been reported in the literature. Furthermore, to enable individualized risk estimation for long‐term all‐cause mortality, the Updated LCSS has been developed by combining the anatomical SYNTAX score and clinical factors. Methods In the randomized GLOBAL LEADERS trial, anatomical SYNTAX score analysis was performed by an independent angiographic corelab for the first 4,000 consecutive patients as a prespecified analysis; of these, 545 presented with STEMI. The efficacy of the mortality predictions of the four scores at 2 years were evaluated based on their discrimination and calibration abilities. Results Complete data was available in 512 patients (93.9%). When the patients were stratified into two groups based on the median of the scores, the prewiring and postwiring Updated LCSSs demonstrated that the high‐score groups were associated with higher rates of 2‐year all‐cause mortality compared to the low‐score groups (6.6 vs. 1.2%; log‐rank p = .001 and 6.6 vs. 1.2%; log‐rank p = .001, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences for predicting the mortality between the prewiring (area under the curve [AUC] 0.625), postwiring MI‐SYNTAX score (AUC 0.614), prewiring (AUC 0.755), and postwiring Updated LCSS (AUC 0.757). In the integrated discrimination improvement (IDI), the prewiring MI‐SYNTAX score had a better discrimination for the mortality than the postwiring MI‐SYNTAX score (IDI ‐0.0082; p = .029). The four scores had acceptable calibration abilities for 2‐year all‐cause mortality. Conclusions The prewiring Updated LCSS predicts long‐term all‐cause mortality with clearly useful discrimination and acceptable calibration. Since the postwiring MI‐SYNTAX score does not improve mortality prediction, the prewiring MI‐SYNTAX score may be preferred for the 2‐year mortality prediction using the Updated LCSS.

Aim The aim of this study was to compare long-term all-cause mortality between patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) using multiple (MAG) or single arterial grafting (SAG). Methods and results The current study is a post hoc analysis of the SYNTAX Extended Survival Study, which compared PCI with CABG in patients with three-vessel (3VD) and/or left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) and evaluated survival with ≥10 years of follow-up. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at maximum follow-up (median 11.9 years) assessed in the as-treated population. Of the 1743 patients, 901 (51.7%) underwent PCI, 532 (30.5%) received SAG, and 310 (17.8%) had MAG. At maximum follow-up, all-cause death occurred in 305 (33.9%), 175 (32.9%), and 70 (22.6%) patients in the PCI, SAG, and MAG groups, respectively (P < 0.001). Multiple arterial grafting [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49–0.89], but not SAG (adjusted HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.67–1.03), was associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality compared with PCI. In patients with 3VD, both MAG (adjusted HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.37–0.81) and SAG (adjusted HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.50–0.91) were associated with significantly lower mortality than PCI, whereas in LMCAD patients, no significant differences between PCI and MAG (adjusted HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.56–1.46) or SAG (adjusted HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.81–1.53) were observed. In patients with revascularization of all three major myocardial territories, a positive correlation was observed between the number of myocardial territories receiving arterial grafts and survival (Ptrend = 0.003). Conclusion Our findings suggest that MAG might be the more desirable configuration for CABG to achieve lower long-term all-cause mortality than PCI in patients with 3VD and/or LMCAD. Trial registration Registered on clinicaltrial.gov. SYNTAXES: NCT03417050 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03417050); SYNTAX: NCT00114972 (https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00114972).

Numerous studies have demonstrated a paradoxical association between higher baseline body mass index (BMI) and lower long-term mortality risk after coronary revascularization, known as the "obesity paradox", possibly relying on the single use of BMI. The current study is a post-hoc analysis of the SYNTAX Extended Survival (SYNTAXES) trial, which is the extended follow-up of the SYNTAX trial comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) in patients with left-main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) or three-vessel disease (3VD). Patients were stratified according to baseline BMI and/or waist circumference (WC). Out of 1,800 patients, 1,799 (99.9%) and 1,587 (88.2%) had available baseline BMI and WC data, respectively. Of those, 1,327 (73.8%) patients had High BMI (≥25 kg/m 2 ), whereas 705 (44.4%) patients had High WC (>102 cm for men or >88 cm for women). When stratified by both BMI and WC, 10-year mortality risk was significantly higher in patients with Low BMI/Low WC (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.09 to 2.51), Low BMI/ High WC (adjusted HR: 2.74; 95% CI: 1.12 to 6.69), or High BMI/High WC (adjusted HR: 1.59; 95% CI: 1.11 to 2.27) compared to those with High BMI/Low WC. In conclusion, the "obesity paradox" following coronary revascularization would be driven by low long-term mortality risk of the High BMI/Low WC group. Body composition should be assessed by the combination of BMI and WC in the appropriate evaluation of the longterm risk of obesity in patients with LMCAD or 3VD.

Background Patients with both diabetes mellitus (DM) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are a subpopulation characterized by ultrahigh ischemic and bleeding risk after percutaneous coronary intervention. There are limited data on the impact of ticagrelor monotherapy among these patients.Methods In this post hoc analysis of the GLOBAL-LEADERS trial, the treatment effects of the experimental (one-month dual-antiplatelet therapy [DAPT] followed by 23-month ticagrelor monotherapy) versus the reference regimen (12-month DAPT followed by 12-month aspirin alone) were analyzed according to DM/CKD status. The primary endpoint was a composite endpoint of all-cause death or new Q-wave myocardial infarction at two-years. The patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE) was defined as the composite of all-cause death, any stroke, site-reported MI and any revascularization, whereas net adverse clinical events (NACE) combined POCE with BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding events.Results At two years, the DM+/CKD+ patients had significantly higher incidences of the primary endpoint (9.5% versus 3.1%, adjusted HR 2.16; 95%CI [1.66-2.80], p<0.001), BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding events, stroke, site-reported myocardial infraction, all revascularization, POCE, and NACE, compared with the DM-/CKD- patients. Among the DM+/CKD+ patients, after adjustment, there were no significant differences in the primary endpoints between the experimental and reference regimen; however, the experimental regimen was associated with lower rates of POCE (20.6% versus 25.9%, HR 0.74; 95%CI [0.55-0.99], p=0.043, pinteraction=0.155) and NACE (22.7% versus 28.3%, HR 0.75; 95%CI [0.56-0.99], p=0.044, pinteraction=0.310), which was mainly driven by a lower rate of all revascularization, as compared with the reference regimen. The landmark analysis showed that while the experimental and reference regimen had similar rates of all the clinical endpoints during the first year, the experimental regimen was associated with significantly lower rates of POCE (5.8% versus 11.0%, HR 0.49; 95%CI [0.29-0.82], p=0.007, pinteraction=0.040) and NACE (5.8% versus 11.2%, HR 0.48; 95%CI [0.29-0.82], p=0.007, pinteraction=0.013) in the second year.Conclusion Among patients with both DM and CKD, ticagrelor monotherapy was not associated with lower rates of all-cause death or new Q-wave, or major bleeding complications; however, it was associated with lower rates of POCE and NACE. These findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating.Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01813435).

Objectives This study aimed to assess the predictive ability of the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score 2.0 in contemporary acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients, and its relation to antiplatelet strategies. Background The predictive value of the GRACE risk score in the contemporary ACS cohort and the appropriate antiplatelet regimen according to the risk remain unclear. Methods This is a subgroup analysis of the all‐comers, randomized GLOBAL LEADERS trial, comparing ticagrelor monotherapy versus conventional dual‐antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The GRACE risk score 2.0 with 1‐year mortality prediction was implemented. The randomized antiplatelet effect was assessed in predefined three GRACE risk‐groups; low‐risk (GRACE <109), moderate‐risk (GRACE 109–140), and high‐risk (GRACE >140). Results The GRACE risk score was available in 6,594 out of 7,487 ACS patients among whom 1,743, 2,823, and 2,028 patients were classified as low‐risk, moderate‐risk, and high‐risk, respectively. At 1 year, all‐cause mortality occurred in 120 patients (1.8%). The discrimination ability of the GRACE model was moderate (C‐statistic = 0.742), whereas 1‐year mortality risk was overestimated (mean predicted mortality rate: 3.9%; the Hosmer‐Lemeshow chi‐square: 21.47; p = 0.006). There were no significant interactions between the GRACE risk strata and effects of the ticagrelor monotherapy on ischemic or bleeding outcomes at 1 year compared to the reference strategy. Conclusion The GRACE risk score 2.0 is valuable in discriminating high risk ACS patients, however, the recalibration of the score is recommended for better risk stratification. There is no significant differences in efficacy and safety of ticagrelor monotherapy across the three GRACE risk strata.