Randomized, controlled trial of coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: six-year follow-up from the Stent or Surgery Trial (SoS)

[Modern coronary surgery, the SYNTAX trial and updated guidelines]

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), a modern and safe procedure, is considered the therapy of choice in the care of patients with multi-vessel disease. The 3-year results of the SYNTAX trial not only showed surgical advantages in terms of repeat revascularisation, but the results also demonstrated significant surgical benefit for myocardial infarction and survival rates. More differentiated analyses showed distinct disadvantages in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) associated with the greater complexity of coronary pathology. PCI tends to be a comparable therapeutic option only in certain cases of left main stem lesions or multi-vessel disease. The findings from the SYNTAX study herald a new era in the treatment of coronary heart disease in which, as recommended in the updated guidelines issued by the EACTS/ESC in 2010, the interventionalist and the surgeon, working closely together as a"heart team", provide a sound therapy plan for affected patients.

Long-term mortality of coronary artery bypass grafting and bare-metal stenting

BACKGROUND

There is little information on relative survival with follow-up longer than 5 years in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting. This study tested the hypothesis that CABG is associated with a lower risk of long-term (8-year) mortality than is stenting with bare-metal stents for multivessel coronary disease.

METHODS

We identified 18,359 patients with multivessel disease who underwent isolated CABG and 13,377 patients who received bare-metal stenting in 1999 to 2000 in New York and followed their vital status through 2007 using the National Death Index (NDI). We matched CABG and stent patients on the number of diseased coronary vessels, proximal left anterior descending (LAD) artery disease, and propensity of undergoing CABG based on numerous patient characteristics and compared survival after the 2 procedures.

RESULTS

In the 7,235 pairs of matched patients, the overall 8-year survival rates were 78.0% for CABG and 71.2% for stenting (hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.74; p < 0.001). For anatomic groups classified by the number of diseased vessels and proximal LAD involvement, the HRs ranged from 0.53 (p < 0.001) for patients with 3-vessel disease involving proximal LAD artery disease to 0.78 (p = 0.05) for patients with 2-vessel disease but no disease in the LAD artery. A lower risk of death after CABG was observed in all subgroups stratified by a number of baseline risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Coronary artery bypass grafting is associated with a lower risk of death than is stenting with bare metal stents for multivessel coronary disease.

Impact of repeated percutaneous coronary intervention on long-term survival after subsequent coronary artery bypass surgery

(Background)

In the current stent era, aggressive repeated percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has become more common. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of previous repeated PCI on the subsequent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

(Methods)

Between January 1990 and January 2008, a total of 894 patients underwent first-time isolated elective CABG. Among the 894 patients, 515 patients had had no PCI (group A), 179 patients had had single PCI (Group B), and 200 patients had had multiple PCI (2-15 times, mean 3.6 ± 2.3 times) (group C) before CABG. These groups were compared in terms of early and late clinical results.

(Results)

Preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction was significantly higher in group A (group A;58 ± 13%, group B;54 ± 12%, and group C;54 ± 12%). Number of bypass grafts was significantly smaller in group C (A:3.3 ± 1.0, B 3.4 ± 0.9, C 3.1 ± 1.0). Although there was no statistically significant difference among the groups, in-hospital mortality in group C was higher than that in group A and B (A:1.6%, B:1.1%, C:3.5%, p = 0.16). Survival analysis by Kaplan-Meier method (mean follow-up: 58 ± 43 methods) revealed that freedom from all-cause death and cardiac death was significantly lower in group C in comparison with group A. Freedom from cardiac event was significantly higher in group C than that in group A. Multivariate analysis identified a number of previous PCI as an independent risk factor for cardiac death.

(Conclusions)

Repeated PCI increased risk for long-term prognosis of subsequent CABG.

Lung transplantation and coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a relative contraindication to lung transplantation. We have offered lung transplantation and coronary revascularization to selected patients with discrete CAD and preserved left ventricular function. The purpose of this report is the following: (1) to examine the short-term and medium-term outcome of patients after coronary revascularization and lung transplantation; and (2) to compare the short-term and medium-term outcome of this cohort to a matched group of lung transplant recipients without CAD.

METHODS

From January 2000 to March 2010, 27 patients with CAD underwent coronary revascularization and lung transplantation. The control group was matched based on age, diagnosis, lung allocation score, and type of procedure.

RESULTS

Lung transplant recipients with CAD and the control group had similar incidence of primary graft dysfunction (grade III). The duration of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit stay, and hospital stay were the same. At a mean follow-up of 3 years, the incidence of composite adverse cardiac events was similar in the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung transplant recipients with CAD and the control group also had similar medium-term survival. Lung transplantation can be considered in patients with preexistent CAD with acceptable early and medium-term outcomes.

Complex coronary anatomy in coronary artery bypass graft surgery: impact of complex coronary anatomy in modern bypass surgery? Lessons learned from the SYNTAX trial after two years

OBJECTIVE

SYNTAX study compares outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting with percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with 3-vessel and/or left main disease. Complexity of coronary artery disease was quantified by the SYNTAX score, which combines anatomic characteristics of each significant lesion. This study aims to clarify whether SYNTAX score affects the outcome of bypass grafting as defined by major adverse cerebrovascular and cardiac events (MACCE) and its components over a 2-year follow-up period.

METHODS

Of the 3075 patients enrolled in SYNTAX, 1541 underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (897 randomized controlled trial patients, and 644 registry patients). All patients undergoing bypass grafting were stratified according to their SYNTAX score into 3 tertiles: low (0-22), intermediate (22-32), and high (≥33) complexity. Clinical outcomes up to 2 years after allocation were determined for each group and further risk factor analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Registry patients had more complex disease than those in the randomized controlled trial (SYNTAX score: registry 37.8 ± 13.3 vs randomized 29.1 ± 11.4; P < .001). At 30 days, overall coronary bypass mortality was 0.9% (registry 0.6% vs randomized 1.2%). MACCE rate at 30 days was 4.4% (registry 3.4% vs randomized 5.2%). SYNTAX score did not significantly affect overall 2-year MACCE rate of 15.6% for low, 14.3% for medium, and 15.4% for high SYNTAX scores. Compared with randomized patients, registry patients had a lower rate of overall MACCE rate (registry 13.0% vs randomized 16.7%; P = .046) and repeat revascularization (4.7% vs 8.6%; P = .003), whereas other event rates were comparable. Risk factor analysis revealed left main disease (P = .049) and incomplete revascularization (P = .005) as predictive for adverse 2-year outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcome of coronary artery bypass grafting was excellent and independent from the SYNTAX score. Incomplete revascularization rather than degree of coronary complexity adversely affects late outcomes of coronary bypass.

Three-vessel coronary disease in diabetics: personalized versus evidence-based revascularization strategy

A steady increase in the number of diabetic patients undergoing coronary revascularization has been recorded in recent years. The causes for this rise are found predominantly in the general demographic development of western industrialized nations, the epidemic progress and wide-spread of diabetes mellitus and changes in assignment behavior. In this article, the specific risk profile of diabetic coronary patients with three-vessel disease in percutaneous or surgical revascularization and tried and tested treatment concepts for this particularly challenging group of patients, with reference to the most recent study results will be presented. Particularly, the peculiarities of coronary heart disease in diabetic patients, the choice of revascularization method, different operative strategies for diabetic patients with coronary heart disease, and challenges faced during follow-up are discussed.

Ten-year follow-up survival of the Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS II): a randomized controlled clinical trial of 3 therapeutic strategies for multivessel coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

This study compared the 10-year follow-up of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery surgery (CABG), and medical treatment (MT) in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, stable angina, and preserved ventricular function.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The primary end points were overall mortality, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or refractory angina that required revascularization. All data were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. At a single institution, 611 patients were randomly assigned to CABG (n=203), PCI (n=205), or MT (n=203). The 10-year survival rates were 74.9% with CABG, 75.1% with PCI, and 69% with MT (P=0.089). The 10-year rates of myocardial infarction were 10.3% with CABG, 13.3% with PCI, and 20.7% with MT (P<0.010). The 10-year rates of additional revascularizations were 7.4% with CABG, 41.9% with PCI, and 39.4% with MT (P<0.001). Relative to the composite end point, Cox regression analysis showed a higher incidence of primary events in MT than in CABG (hazard ratio 2.35, 95% confidence interval 1.78 to 3.11) and in PCI than in CABG (hazard ratio 1.85, 95% confidence interval 1.39 to 2.47). Furthermore, 10-year rates of freedom from angina were 64% with CABG, 59% with PCI, and 43% with MT (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with CABG, MT was associated with a significantly higher incidence of subsequent myocardial infarction, a higher rate of additional revascularization, a higher incidence of cardiac death, and consequently a 2.29-fold increased risk of combined events. PCI was associated with an increased need for further revascularization, a higher incidence of myocardial infarction, and a 1.46-fold increased risk of combined events compared with CABG. Additionally, CABG was better than MT at eliminating anginal symptoms. Clinical Trial Registration Information- URL: http://www.controlled-trials.com.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN66068876.

Three-year outcomes of multivessel revascularization in very elderly acute coronary syndrome patients

BACKGROUND

Comparative effectiveness of interventional treatment strategies for the very elderly with acute coronary syndrome remains poorly defined due to study exclusions. Interventions include percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), usually with stents, or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The elderly are frequently directed to PCI because of provider perceptions that PCI is at therapeutic equipoise with CABG and that CABG incurs increased risk. We evaluated long-term outcomes of CABG versus PCI in a cohort of very elderly Medicare beneficiaries presenting with acute coronary syndrome.

METHODS

Using Medicare claims data, we analyzed outcomes of multivessel PCI or CABG treatment for a cohort of 10,141 beneficiaries age 85 and older diagnosed with acute coronary syndrome in 2003 and 2004. The cohort was followed for survival and composite outcomes (death, repeat revascularization, stroke, acute myocardial infarction) for three years. Logistic regressions controlled for patient demographics and comorbidities with propensity score adjustment for procedure selection.

RESULTS

Percutaneous coronary intervention showed early benefits of lesser morbidity and mortality, but CABG outcomes improved relative to PCI outcomes by three years (p < 0.01). At 36 months post-initial revascularization, 66.0% of CABG recipients survived (versus 62.7% of PCI recipients, p < 0.05) and 46.1% of CABG recipients were free from composite outcome (versus 38.7% of PCI recipients, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In very elderly patients with ACS and multivessel CAD, CABG appears to offer an advantage over PCI of survival and freedom from composite endpoint at three years. Optimizing the benefit of CABG in very elderly patients requires absence of significant congestive heart failure, lung disease, and peripheral vascular disease.

Competing risk analysis of events 10 years after revascularization

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the influence of competing risk (CR) non-cardiac death during long-term follow-up of revascularized patients on the interpretation of the cardiac outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospectively, we compared outcomes estimated with the Kaplan-Meier and the cumulative incidence function (CIF) methods after a median 10.8 years follow-up in 1,234 consecutive patients (594 CABG, 640 PCI) undergoing first time non-emergent revascularization in a community cohort.

RESULTS

Overall 301 (24.4%) patients died (27.3% in the CABG vs. 21.7% in the PCI group, p = 0.02). The causes of death were cardiac (10.3%) and non-cardiac (14.1%). CR analysis showed a similar probability of cardiac death (CIF 0.10 (95% CI 0.092, 0.18) vs. 0.093 (0.07, 0.12)) in the CABG and PCI treated patients, respectively. The probability for acute myocardial infarction (CIF 0.12 vs. 0.16 p < 0.001), congestive heart failure (CIF 0.15 vs. 0.09 p = 0.007) in the CABG and PCI group respectively, differed. The differences were also statistically significant after multivariate adjustment for the competing risks of death. For all outcomes the Kaplan-Meier method overestimated risk estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

The competing risk adjusted probability for cardiac death, but not other cardiac endpoints are comparable in patients treated with either CABG or PCI after very long-term follow-up. The risk for all-cause death was mainly predicted by the occurrence of non-cardiac diseases.

A clinical and angiographic study of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting coronary stent system in the treatment of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. Study design and rationale of the EXECUTIVE trial

BACKGROUND

Myocardial revascularization with drug-eluting stents (DESs) is emerging as an alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MV-CAD). First-generation DESs have yielded equivalent safety results at mid-term compared with surgery, but inferior efficacy in preventing the recurrence of ischemic symptoms. The outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention with a second-generation everolimus DES as compared with a paclitaxel DES in patients with MV-CAD has not been established.

AIM OF THE STUDY

The aim of the study is the assessment of the efficacy and performance of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent in the treatment of de-novo coronary artery lesions in patients with MV-CAD.

STUDY DESIGN

The study is composed of two parts: a prospective, double arm, randomized multicenter trial to assess the angiographic efficacy of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting coronary stent system (EECSS) compared with the Taxus Liberté Paclitaxel Eluting Coronary Stent System (Taxus Liberté Stent) and a prospective, open-label, single arm, controlled registry to analyze the clinical efficacy and safety of XIENCE V EECSS at mid-term and long-term follow-up in patients treated for MV-CAD.

ENDPOINTS

For the EXECUTIVE randomized trial, the primary endpoint is in-stent late lumen loss at 9 months. For the EXECUTIVE registry, the primary endpoint is a composite of all death, myocardial infarction (Q-wave and non-Q-wave), and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization at 12 months. The study will be conducted at 30 study centers in Italy and 600 patients will be enrolled in total: 200 patients will be enrolled (1: 1) in the randomized trial and 400 patients will enter the registry.

SAMPLE SIZE

It was calculated that, assuming a mean in-stent late lumen loss of 0.20 +/- 0.41 mm in the XIENCE V EECSS arm and 0.30 +/- 0.53 mm in the Taxus Liberté stent arm, and a noninferiority margin delta of 0.12 (according to the SPIRIT III results), the analysis of 81 lesions per arm would provide over 90% power. Therefore, 200 patients will be enrolled to account for dropouts.

CONCLUSION

The present study is expected to provide as yet unavailable information about the performance of second-generation stents in the specific setting of patients with MV-CAD.

Acute coronary syndromes: Diagnosis and management, part II

At the most severe end of the spectrum of acute coronary syndromes is ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), which usually occurs when a fibrin-rich thrombus completely occludes an epicardial coronary artery. The diagnosis of STEMI is based on clinical characteristics and persistent ST-segment elevation as demonstrated by 12-lead electrocardiography. Patients with STEMI should undergo rapid assessment for reperfusion therapy, and a reperfusion strategy should be implemented promptly after the patient's contact with the health care system. Two methods are currently available for establishing timely coronary reperfusion: primary percutaneous coronary intervention and fibrinolytic therapy. Percutaneous coronary intervention is the preferred method but is not always available. Antiplatelet agents and anticoagulants are critical adjuncts to reperfusion. This article summarizes the current evidence-based guidelines for the diagnosis and management of STEMI. This summary is followed by a brief discussion of the role of noninvasive stress testing in the assessment of patients with acute coronary syndrome and their selection for coronary revascularization.

Surgical versus percutaneous revascularization of coronary artery disease in diabetic patients

Morbidity and mortality related to coronary artery disease (CAD) remain a great challenge in patients with diabetes mellitus. Revascularization of CAD is an important therapeutic intervention owing to its impact on both symptoms and prognosis. The optimal revascularization strategy continues to evolve due to the advent of new technologies and improved peri-procedural outcome with both percutaneous coronary interventions and coronary artery bypass grafting. Although clinical outcome following coronary artery bypass is worse in diabetic as opposed to non-diabetic patients, surgical revascularization tends to be associated with better outcome in stable patients with multivessel disease and reduced left ventricular function. The advent of drug-eluting stents has challenged the supremacy of coronary artery bypass grafting and has become a valuable alternative to surgery. The safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents in the treatment of patients with diabetes and multivessel disease is currently under investigation in several ongoing randomized controlled trials. Percutaneous coronary intervention is the therapy of choice in patients with acute coronary syndromes, particularly ST-elevation myocardial infarction. The focus of this review is to present the current evidence, define the role of percutaneous and surgical revascularization in the treatment of diabetic patients with CAD, and propose a tailored approach for clinical decision-making.

The effect of previous coronary artery stenting on short- and intermediate-term outcome after surgical revascularization in patients with diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVES

Percutaneous intervention for coronary revascularization is associated with an increased risk of repeat revascularization, especially in patients with diabetes mellitus. In this study we sought to examine the effect of previous percutaneous intervention on the rate of adverse perioperative outcome and intermediate-term survival in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery.

METHODS

Between January 1, 2001, and December 31, 2006, 1758 consecutive patients with diabetes mellitus who underwent first-time isolated coronary artery bypass surgery were identified. Survival and major perioperative complications for 1537 patients who did not have prior percutaneous intervention (group 1) were compared with those in 221 patients with prior percutaneous intervention (group 2) after adjusting for baseline risk factors. Vital status was determined by using the National Death Index and Social Security Death Index. Age-adjusted survival at 2 years' follow-up was calculated with the Cox singular proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

At baseline, group 2 patients had higher incidences of hypercholesterolemia and myocardial infarction. Compared with group 1 patient, group 2 patients had significantly higher operative mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 4.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.41-11.63), perioperative major adverse cardiac events (adjusted odds ratio, 2.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-6.85), and atrial fibrillation (adjusted odds ratio, 1.97; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-3.01). Group 2 patients had worse age-adjusted survival at 2 years' follow-up (93.4% vs 87.4%, P < .017).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with diabetes mellitus and a history of percutaneous coronary stenting before coronary artery bypass surgery were found to have an increased risk of operative death, increased perioperative complications, and decreased age-adjusted survival at 2 years' follow-up.

Comparison of drug-eluting stents and coronary artery bypass surgery for the treatment of multivessel coronary disease: three-year follow-up results from a single institution

BACKGROUND

Numerous studies have compared the outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery and coronary stenting for the treatment of multivessel coronary disease. In 2003, drug-eluting stents were introduced with the hope of reducing restenosis. However, limited information exists on the comparison of drug-eluting stents and CABG surgery. The long-term outcome of drug-eluting stents compared with that of CABG surgery is also unclear.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We identified 3720 consecutive patients with multivessel disease who underwent isolated CABG surgery or received drug-eluting stents between April 1, 2004, and December 31, 2005, and we compared safety (total mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke) and efficacy (target-vessel revascularization) during a 3-year follow-up. These outcomes were compared after adjustment for differences in baseline risk factors. Patients who underwent CABG (n=1886) were older and had more comorbidities than patients who received drug-eluting stents (n=1834). Patients receiving drug-eluting stents had considerably higher 3-year rates of target-vessel revascularization. Drug-eluting stents were also associated with higher rates of death (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.62; 95% confidence interval, 1.07 to 2.47) and myocardial infarction (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.15 to 2.44). The risk adjusted rate of stroke was similar in the 2 groups (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.69 to 1.51).

CONCLUSIONS

In a cohort of patients with multivessel disease, CABG was associated with lower rates of death, myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization than drug-eluting stents.

Coronary artery bypass surgery compared with percutaneous coronary interventions for multivessel disease: a collaborative analysis of individual patient data from ten randomised trials

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are alternative treatments for multivessel coronary disease. Although the procedures have been compared in several randomised trials, their long-term effects on mortality in key clinical subgroups are uncertain. We undertook a collaborative analysis of data from randomised trials to assess whether the effects of the procedures on mortality are modified by patient characteristics.

METHODS

We pooled individual patient data from ten randomised trials to compare the effectiveness of CABG with PCI according to patients' baseline clinical characteristics. We used stratified, random effects Cox proportional hazards models to test the effect on all-cause mortality of randomised treatment assignment and its interaction with clinical characteristics. All analyses were by intention to treat.

FINDINGS

Ten participating trials provided data on 7812 patients. PCI was done with balloon angioplasty in six trials and with bare-metal stents in four trials. Over a median follow-up of 5.9 years (IQR 5.0-10.0), 575 (15%) of 3889 patients assigned to CABG died compared with 628 (16%) of 3923 patients assigned to PCI (hazard ratio [HR] 0.91, 95% CI 0.82-1.02; p=0.12). In patients with diabetes (CABG, n=615; PCI, n=618), mortality was substantially lower in the CABG group than in the PCI group (HR 0.70, 0.56-0.87); however, mortality was similar between groups in patients without diabetes (HR 0.98, 0.86-1.12; p=0.014 for interaction). Patient age modified the effect of treatment on mortality, with hazard ratios of 1.25 (0.94-1.66) in patients younger than 55 years, 0.90 (0.75-1.09) in patients aged 55-64 years, and 0.82 (0.70-0.97) in patients 65 years and older (p=0.002 for interaction). Treatment effect was not modified by the number of diseased vessels or other baseline characteristics.

INTERPRETATION

Long-term mortality is similar after CABG and PCI in most patient subgroups with multivessel coronary artery disease, so choice of treatment should depend on patient preferences for other outcomes. CABG might be a better option for patients with diabetes and patients aged 65 years or older because we found mortality to be lower in these subgroups.

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) involving drug-eluting stents is increasingly used to treat complex coronary artery disease, although coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been the treatment of choice historically. Our trial compared PCI and CABG for treating patients with previously untreated three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease (or both).

METHODS

We randomly assigned 1800 patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease to undergo CABG or PCI (in a 1:1 ratio). For all these patients, the local cardiac surgeon and interventional cardiologist determined that equivalent anatomical revascularization could be achieved with either treatment. A noninferiority comparison of the two groups was performed for the primary end point--a major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (i.e., death from any cause, stroke, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization) during the 12-month period after randomization. Patients for whom only one of the two treatment options would be beneficial, because of anatomical features or clinical conditions, were entered into a parallel, nested CABG or PCI registry.

RESULTS

Most of the preoperative characteristics were similar in the two groups. Rates of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events at 12 months were significantly higher in the PCI group (17.8%, vs. 12.4% for CABG; P=0.002), in large part because of an increased rate of repeat revascularization (13.5% vs. 5.9%, P<0.001); as a result, the criterion for noninferiority was not met. At 12 months, the rates of death and myocardial infarction were similar between the two groups; stroke was significantly more likely to occur with CABG (2.2%, vs. 0.6% with PCI; P=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

CABG remains the standard of care for patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease, since the use of CABG, as compared with PCI, resulted in lower rates of the combined end point of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events at 1 year. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00114972.)

Long-term safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting and coronary artery bypass surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis with 5-year patient-level data from the ARTS, ERACI-II, MASS-II, and SoS trials

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials that studied clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bare metal stenting versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are underpowered to properly assess safety end points like death, stroke, and myocardial infarction. Pooling data from randomized controlled trials increases the statistical power and allows better assessment of the treatment effect in high-risk subgroups.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a pooled analysis of 3051 patients in 4 randomized trials evaluating the relative safety and efficacy of PCI with stenting and CABG at 5 years for the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease. The primary end point was the composite end point of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. The secondary end point was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular accidents, death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization. We tested for heterogeneities in treatment effect in patient subgroups. At 5 years, the cumulative incidence of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke was similar in patients randomized to PCI with stenting versus CABG (16.7% versus 16.9%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.04, 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.27; P=0.69). Repeat revascularization, however, occurred significantly more frequently after PCI than CABG (29.0% versus 7.9%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.18 to 0.29; P<0.001). Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were significantly higher in the PCI than the CABG group (39.2% versus 23.0%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.45 to 0.61; P<0.001). No heterogeneity of treatment effect was found in the subgroups, including diabetic patients and those presenting with 3-vessel disease.

CONCLUSIONS

In this pooled analysis of 4 randomized trials, PCI with stenting was associated with a long-term safety profile similar to that of CABG. However, as a result of persistently lower repeat revascularization rates in the CABG patients, overall major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event rates were significantly lower in the CABG group at 5 years.