RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Myocardial revascularization failure (MRF) and Secondary revascularization (SR) are contemporary interventional cardiology challenges. AIM: To investigate the characteristics, management, and prognosis of patients with myocardial revascularization failure (MRF) and need for secondary revascularization (SR) in contemporary practice. METHODS: The REVASEC study is a prospective registry (NCT03349385), which recruited patients with prior revascularization referred for coronary angiography at 19 centers. The primary endpoint is a patient-oriented composite (POCE) at 1 year, including death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization. RESULTS: A total of 869 patients previously revascularized by percutaneous intervention (83%) or surgery (17%) were recruited. MRF was found in 83.7% (41.1% stent/graft failure, 32.1% progression of coronary disease, and 10.5% residual disease). SR was performed in 70.1%, preferably by percutaneous intervention (95%). The POCE rate at 1 year was 14% in the overall cohort, with 6.4% all-cause death. In the multivariate analysis, lower POCE rates were found in the groups without MRF (9.4%) and with disease progression (11%) compared with graft/stent failure (17%) and residual disease (18%), hazard ratio 0.67 (95% confidence interval: 0.45-0.99), p = 0.043. At 1 year, the SR group had less chronic persistent angina (19% vs. 34%, p < 0.001), but a higher rate of repeat revascularization (9% vs. 2.9%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: MRF was found in 84% of patients with prior revascularization referred for coronary angiography. Stent/graft failure and residual coronary disease were associated with a worse prognosis. SR provided better symptom control at the expense of a higher rate of new revascularization.
RESUMEN
AIM: To investigate key aspects of the problem of myocardial revascularization failure (MRF) and repeat or secondary myocardial revascularization (SR) in contemporary practice. METHODS: The registry of secondary revascularization (REVASEC) is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, prospective registry enhanced with data monitoring and independent event adjudication (ClinicalTrials.govNCT03349385). It includes patients with prior revascularization referred to coronary angiography for suspected MRF with broad inclusion criteria. The main objectives are to describe the characteristics of patients with prior revascularization referred for repeat angiography, to describe and the rate and mechanisms of MRF (stent or graft failure, coronary artery disease progression or residual coronary artery disease); to evaluate the management including medical treatment and SR of these patients; and to assess the prognosis according to the outlined causative mechanisms. The registry has one year follow up for the primary endpoint (Patient-oriented composite endpoint including all-cause death, any myocardial infarction or any new unplanned revascularization according to subsets of MRF), but extended follow-up will be carried out up to 5 years. CONCLUSION: The REVASEC Registry will provide updated data on the characteristics, patterns of treatment, and 1-year outcomes of patients with MRF and SR in contemporary clinical practice.