Background/Objectives: Few studies have analyzed in-hospital complications and events following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) procedures for patients who underwent these interventions for single-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD). This study aims to compare the outcomes of PCI and CABG in such patients using a large propensity-matched real-world database based on procedural codes. Methods: Adult patients receiving PCI or CABG for single-vessel CAD were identified from the 2016–2020 National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database. Any cases targeting multi-vessel disease or employing a multi-treatment approach were excluded using appropriate procedural codes. Differences in events and complications from admission to discharge were studied between the two procedures (PCI vs. CABG) via logistic regression analysis. Results: After propensity matching with 273,380 patients in both groups, complication risks such as cardiac tamponade (aOR: 3.6 [3.27–3.96]), acute kidney injury (aOR: 1.53 [1.51–1.56]), cardiogenic shock (aOR: 1.38 [1.34–1.40]), procedural bleeding (aOR: 1.75 [1.67–1.83]), acute ischemic stroke (aOR: 1.89 [1.80–1.97]), and all-cause mortality (aOR: 1.05 [1.02–1.08]) were higher among CABG patients. No differences were observed for events of cardiac perforation (aOR: 0.92, [0.84–1.01]). Conclusions: In this large real-world propensity-matched analysis, CABG was associated with higher risks of multiple in-hospital complications and all-cause mortality compared to PCI following a single-vessel coronary intervention.

Introduction: Isolated cardiac sarcoidosis (ICS) is characterized by a lack of the apparent extra-cardiac involvement seen in systemic cardiac sarcoidosis (SCS) and is being increasingly recognized as a distinct clinical phenotype of cardiac sarcoidosis. This systematic review and meta-analysis pooled data from published literature to assess any differences in outcomes of ICS vs. SCS patients.Material and methods: Studies were identified from PubMed/Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Risk ratios were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method in a random effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Higgins I2 statistic. Leave-one-out sensitivity analysis was also performed. The primary outcome was a composite of MACE, including cardiac death, ventricular arrhythmias, or hospitalization for heart failure. The secondary outcomes included sudden cardiac death, arrhythmias, and heart-failure-related hospitalizations.Results: The analysis included 7 studies and 918 CS patients (28.9% ICS and 71.1% SCS). Increased risk for arrhythmias (RR = 3.06, 95% CI: 0.98 to 9.55, p = 0.05, I2 = 67%) in patients with ICS compared to SCS was observed. No significant difference was observed for composite outcome (RR = 1.43, 95% CI: 0.93 to 2.18, p = 0.10, I2 = 0%), HF-related hospitalizations (RR = 6.83, 95% CI: 0.47 to 100.33, p = 0.16, I2 = 80%), or cardiac death (RR = 1.85, 95% CI: 0.49 to 7.08, p = 0.37, I2 = 0%) between the two groups.Conclusions: Although ICS patients were more likely to experience arrhythmias, no significant difference was observed between ICS and SCS patients for composite outcome, cardiac death, or hospitalizations due to heart failure.