Open access
Open access
Powered by Google Translator Translator

RCT: PCI Reduces Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Patients Undergoing TAVI with Significant Coronary Artery Disease

14 Sep, 2024 | 19:09h | UTC

Background:

Severe aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease (CAD) frequently coexist, particularly in the elderly population. Approximately 50% of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have concurrent CAD. The optimal management of significant coronary lesions in patients undergoing TAVI remains uncertain, with guidelines providing no clear recommendations. Understanding whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) improves outcomes in this setting is crucial for guiding clinical practice.

Objective:

To evaluate whether routine PCI of physiologically significant coronary lesions improves clinical outcomes compared to conservative management in patients with stable CAD undergoing TAVI.

Methods:

  • Design: International, multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial (NOTION-3).
  • Participants: 455 patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis scheduled for TAVI and at least one significant coronary lesion (defined as fractional flow reserve [FFR] ≤0.80 or diameter stenosis ≥90%).
  • Interventions:
    • PCI Group (n=227): Underwent PCI of all eligible lesions followed by TAVI.
    • Conservative Treatment Group (n=228): Received TAVI without prior PCI.
  • Primary Endpoint: Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction (MI), or urgent revascularization.
  • Secondary Endpoints: Included individual components of the primary endpoint, bleeding events, stroke, hospital admissions for heart failure, and procedural complications.
  • Follow-Up: Median of 2 years (interquartile range, 1 to 4 years).

Results:

  • Baseline Characteristics: Median age was 82 years; 67% were men; median Society of Thoracic Surgeons–Procedural Risk of Mortality (STS-PROM) score was 3%.
  • Primary Endpoint (MACE):
    • Occurred in 26% of patients in the PCI group versus 36% in the conservative group.
    • Hazard Ratio (HR): 0.71 (95% Confidence Interval [CI], 0.51 to 0.99; P=0.04), indicating a 29% relative risk reduction with PCI.
  • Components of MACE:
    • Myocardial Infarction:
      • Lower incidence in the PCI group.
    • Urgent Revascularization:
      • Reduced need in the PCI group.
  • All-Cause Mortality:
    • No significant difference between groups.
  • Bleeding Events:
    • Higher in the PCI group (28% vs. 20%; HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.03 to 2.22).
    • Bleeding assessed according to Valve Academic Research Consortium–2 criteria.
  • Procedural Complications:
    • PCI-related complications occurred in 3% of patients in the PCI group.
  • Safety Endpoints:
    • Similar rates of stroke and stent thrombosis between groups.
    • Acute kidney injury was less frequent in the PCI group (5% vs. 11%; HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.89).

Conclusions:

In patients with stable CAD and severe symptomatic aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI, performing PCI on significant coronary lesions resulted in a statistically significant reduction in MACE over a median follow-up of 2 years compared to conservative management. The benefit was primarily due to reductions in myocardial infarction and urgent revascularization rates. However, this advantage was accompanied by an increased risk of bleeding events.

Clinical Implications:

  • Patient Selection: PCI should be considered in patients with physiologically significant coronary lesions (FFR ≤0.80 or diameter stenosis ≥90%) undergoing TAVI.
  • Risk–Benefit Analysis: Clinicians should balance the reduction in MACE against the increased bleeding risk when deciding on PCI.
  • Treatment Strategy: The findings support a strategy of routine revascularization in this patient population to improve cardiovascular outcomes.
  • Future Considerations: Further research is needed to determine the optimal timing of PCI relative to TAVI and to identify which patient subgroups may derive the most benefit.

Recommendations:

  • Guideline Update: The results may inform future guidelines to provide clearer recommendations on managing CAD in patients undergoing TAVI.
  • Individualized Care: Decisions regarding PCI should be individualized, considering patient comorbidities, anatomical complexity, and bleeding risk.
  • Antithrombotic Therapy: Attention to antiplatelet and anticoagulation strategies is important to mitigate bleeding risks.

Study Limitations:

  • Exclusion of patients with recent acute coronary syndromes and left main coronary artery disease limits the generalizability.
  • Changes in antithrombotic regimens over the study period reflect evolving clinical practice but may affect outcomes.
  • Majority of patients had low to intermediate SYNTAX scores, so results may not apply to those with more complex CAD.

Final Note:

The NOTION-3 trial provides valuable evidence supporting the use of PCI in patients with significant CAD undergoing TAVI, emphasizing the importance of comprehensive cardiovascular care in this high-risk population.

Reference: Lønborg, J., et al. (2024). PCI in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic-valve implantation. New England Journal of Medicine. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2401513

 


Stay Updated in Your Specialty

Telegram Channels
Free

WhatsApp alerts 10-day free trial

No spam, just news.