Left main coronary artery disease. Clinical and angiographic features. A retrospective study regarding two groups of patients with left main coronary artery disease and three-vessel disease.

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the ability of clinical and instrumental features to identify patients with left main coronary artery disease (LMCD) compared with a three-vessel coronary artery disease group. METHODS: A cohort of 70 patients with LMCD was matched with another one of 66 patients with three-vessel disease. A history of angina before angiography was similar in both groups; the higher degrees of stable angina and the forms of unstable angina were moderately prevalent in the group with LMCD. RESULTS: In the last subgroup a significantly reduced incidence of previous acute myocardial infarction (AMI) was observed (p < 0.05). The resting electrocardiogram (ECG) showed higher incidence of atrial fibrillation (fa) and left bundle branch block (BBS) in the subjects with LMCD, with a statistic value (p < 0.05). The exercise test performed by a lot of patients appeared equally positive for inducible ischemia in the 2 groups. Significantly higher exercise peak load was achieved by the patients with three-vessel disease (p < 0.05). The coronary angiography showed a prevalence of right dominant circulation in the 2 groups; significantly the collateral circulation was more represented in the subjects with three-vessel disease (p < 0.05). Most patients with LMCD underwent a bypass coronary artery graft surgery (CABG surgery) more frequently than the ones with three-vessel disease (p < 0.01). In the former group the cardiovascular mortality within an average 2-year follow-up proved higher as to the latter group even if without statistic significance. CONCLUSIONS: Nevertheless this retrospective study showed some limitations. Particularly the incidence of clinical and instrumental variables and their capacity to differentiate LMCD patients from those with three-vessel disease were not demonstrated.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.