This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 117/6/790    most recent CIRCULATIONAHA.106.651232v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Coolong, A. Articles by Mauri, L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Coolong, A. Articles by Mauri, L. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Angioplasty Related Collections Catheter-based coronary interventions: stents Other Treatment Related Article

(Circulation. 2008;117:790-797.)
© 2008 American Heart Association, Inc.

Interventional Cardiology

Saphenous Vein Graft Stenting and Major Adverse Cardiac Events

A Predictive Model Derived From a Pooled Analysis of 3958 Patients

Alanna Coolong, MD, MSc; Donald S. Baim, MD; Richard E. Kuntz, MD, MSc; A. James O’Malley, PhD; Sachin Marulkar, MBBS, MPH; Donald E. Cutlip, MD; Jeffrey J. Popma, MD; Laura Mauri, MD, MSc

From the Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass (A.C., L.M.); Boston Scientific, Natick, Mass (D.S.B.); Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minn (R.E.K.); and Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School (A.J.O.), Beth Israel-Deaconess Medical Center (D.E.C.), St Elizabeth’s Medical Center (J.J.P.), and Harvard Clinical Research Institute (A.C., S.M., D.E.C., L.M.), Boston, Mass.

Correspondence to Laura Mauri, MD, MSc, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115. E-mail lmauri1{at}partners.org

Received July 21, 2006; accepted November 27, 2007.

Background— Treatment of saphenous vein graft (SVG) stenosis with percutaneous coronary intervention has a 15% to 20% incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) within 30 days. Although MACE rates are reduced significantly by the use of embolic protection devices (EPDs), neither the level of baseline risk nor the benefit provided by EPDs has been well characterized.

Methods and Results— Data from 5 randomized controlled trials and 1 registry evaluating EPDs in SVG percutaneous coronary intervention (n=3958 patients) were pooled for analysis. MACE was defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. Baseline variables and 2 summary angiographic variables (an SVG degeneration score and an estimate of lesion plaque volume) were included in a multivariable logistic regression model to predict 30-day MACE, with adjustment for the type of device used and inter-study variation. The angiographic variables were potent predictors of MACE (increasing SVG degeneration score, P<0.0001; larger estimated plaque volume, P<0.0001), with significant contributions from the presence of thrombus (P<0.01), increasing patient age (P<0.01), glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor use (P=0.02), and current tobacco abuse (P=0.03). The treatment benefit of EPDs was preserved across all categories of risk as categorized by SVG degeneration or plaque volume.

Conclusions— The strongest predictors of 30-day MACE in SVG percutaneous coronary intervention are angiographic estimates of plaque volume and SVG degeneration. Identification of these predictors of 30-day MACE allows reliable prediction of patient outcomes and confirms consistent treatment benefit with the use of EPDs across the range of patients tested in randomized trials.

---

 

CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE

Related Article:

Clinical Summaries
Circulation 2008 117: 711-713. [Extract] [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. R. Dixon, C. L. Grines, and W. W. O'Neill The year in interventional cardiology. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., June 2, 2009; 53(22): 2080 - 2097. [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. S. Brilakis, C. Lichtenwalter, J. A. de Lemos, M. Roesle, O. Obel, D. Haagen, B. Saeed, C. Gadiparthi, J. K. Bissett, R. Sachdeva, et al. A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent Versus a Similar Bare-Metal Stent in Saphenous Vein Graft Lesions: The SOS (Stenting Of Saphenous Vein Grafts) Trial J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., March 17, 2009; 53(11): 919 - 928. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. R. Holmes Jr and D. O. Williams Catheter-Based Treatment of Coronary Artery Disease: Past, Present, and Future Circ Cardiovasc Interv, August 1, 2008; 1(1): 60 - 73. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. J. Kereiakes, M. A. Turco, J. Breall, N. Z. Farhat, R. L. Feldman, B. McLaurin, J. J. Popma, L. Mauri, P. Zimetbaum, J. Massaro, et al. A Novel Filter-Based Distal Embolic Protection Device for Percutaneous Intervention of Saphenous Vein Graft Lesions: Results of the AMEthyst Randomized Controlled Trial J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv., June 1, 2008; 1(3): 248 - 257. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. R. Bates Aspirating and Filtering Atherothrombotic Debris During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv., June 1, 2008; 1(3): 265 - 267. [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. A. Bittl Damage Control for Renal Artery Stenting Circulation, May 27, 2008; 117(21): 2724 - 2726. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. P. Fiorentino, B. Zuckerman, and T. Uchida Regulatory Perspective on Embolic Protection Device Approval for Saphenous Vein Graft Stenting With a Single-Arm Trial Using Risk-Adjusted Prediction Model Circulation, February 12, 2008; 117(6): 714 - 716. [Full Text] [PDF]