Dataset Information

Impact of time factor and patient characteristics on the efficacy of PCI vs CABG for left main coronary disease: A meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The impact of time factor and patient characteristics on the efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents vs. coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary disease is unclear.

Methods

We searched PubMed and Embase for related trials. Two outcomes of interest were major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE, defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, or unplanned revascularization) and a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis stratified by follow-up duration and 7 factors of interest related to patient characteristics. Random-effects meta-regression was performed to calculate P values for trend and those for subgroup differences.

Results

We included 11 articles from 5 trials. Compared with CABG, PCI increased MACCE at the end of 3-year (hazard ratio [HR] 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.40, I2 = 0) and 5-year (HR 1.33, 95% CI 1.20-1.48, I2 = 0) follow-up, but did not increase all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The logarithm of HR of PCI vs CABG for MACCE increased as follow-up duration increased (β = 0.057, P = .025). PCI vs CABG consistently increased 5-year MACCE across various subgroups defined by 7 factors of interest (Psubgroup ranged from .156 to .830).

Conclusions

The long-term benefit of CABG vs PCI on MACCE in patients with left main coronary disease is consistent across patients with different clinical characteristics. The relative benefit of CABG on MACCE is driven by that of CABG on unplanned revascularization, and becomes greater as time goes on.

SUBMITTER: Qiu M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7969225 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of time factor and patient characteristics on the efficacy of PCI vs CABG for left main coronary disease: A meta-analysis.

Qiu Mei M Qiu Mei M Ding Liangliang L Zhan Zelin Z Zhou Hairong H

Medicine 20210301 10

<h4>Background</h4>The impact of time factor and patient characteristics on the efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents vs. coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary disease is unclear.<h4>Methods</h4>We searched PubMed and Embase for related trials. Two outcomes of interest were major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE, defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, or unplanned revascularizat ...[more]

PMID: 33725893

Similar Datasets

Project description:There have been no studies comparing clinical outcomes of physiology-guided revascularization in patients with unprotected left main coronary disease (ULMD) between percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes between PCI and CABG of patients with physiologically significant ULMD. From an international multicenter registry of ULMD patients interrogated with instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), we analyzed data from 151 patients (85 PCI vs. 66 CABG) who underwent revascularization according to the cutoff value of iFR ≤ 0.89. Propensity score matching was employed to adjust for baseline clinical characteristics. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. The secondary endpoints were the individual components of the primary endpoint. Mean age was 66.6 (± 9.2) years, 79.2% male. Mean SYNTAX score was 22.6 (± 8.4) and median iFR was 0.83 (IQR 0.74-0.87). After performing propensity score matching analysis, 48 patients treated with CABG were matched to those who underwent PCI. At a median follow-up period of 2.8 years, the primary endpoint occurred in 8.3% in PCI group and 20.8% in CABG group, respectively (HR 3.80; 95% CI 1.04-13.9; p = 0.043). There was no difference in each component of the primary event (p > 0.05 for all). Within the present study, iFR-guided PCI was associated with lower cardiovascular events rate in patients with ULMD and intermediate SYNTAX score, as compared to CABG. State-of-the-art PCI vs. CABG for ULMD. Study design and primary endpoint in patients with physiologically significant ULMD. MACE was defined as the composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. The blue line denotes the PCI arm, and the red line denotes the CABG arm. PCI was associated with significantly lower risk of MACE than CABG. CABG: coronary artery bypass grafting; iFR: instantaneous wave-free ratio; MACE: major adverse cardiovascular events; PCI: percutaneous coronary intervention; ULMD: unprotected left main coronary artery disease.

Project description:Background and objectiveThe treatment of left main (LM) coronary artery disease (CAD) requires complex decision-making. Patients with left main multi-vessel coronary artery disease (LM CAD) have concerns regarding incomplete revascularization and reduced survival with off-pump (OPCAB) when compared with on-pump (ONCAB) coronary bypass surgery. To evaluate outcomes among high-risk LM CAD patients undergoing OPCAB, we performed a registry-based prospective study.MethodsWe performed 4868 coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgeries from Jan 2013 to Jun 2019 with 4662 (95.8%) OPCAB. In OPCAB cohort, we had 1323 patients (28.4%) with significant LM (> 50%) triple vessel CAD. Data regarding clinical features, extent of CAD, operative details, in-hospital outcomes, and 3-year follow-up were obtained. Descriptive statistics are reported.ResultsThe study cohort (n = 1323) was aged 63 ± 9 years with men 88.4%. Tobacco use was in 328 (24.8%), diabetes 598 (45.2%), previous myocardial infarction 463 (35.0%), previous coronary intervention 40 (3.0%), and congestive heart failure in 54 (4.1%). All patients had LM (100.0%) with triple vessel disease in 99.4% (LAD, left anterior descending 100.0%; LCX, left circumflex 99.4%; RCA, right coronary artery 78.7%). Vessels bypassed/patient were 2.7 ± 0.4 with 3.2 ± 0.7 total grafts and 2.1 ± 0.8 venous grafts. In total, 1278 (96.5%) patients received left internal mammary artery (LIMA), 63(4.7%) bilateral internal mammary artery (BIMA), and 74 (5.6%) radial artery grafts. There was no patient with conversion from OPCAB to ONCAB. In-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: all-cause deaths, myocardial infarction, and stroke) were in 21 (1.6%). At 3-year follow-up (n = 1041), MACE rates were in 84 (8.1%) and cardiovascular deaths in 28 (2.7%).ConclusionsThis study shows that off-pump CABG surgery is safe in patients with LM CAD. There is low in-hospital mortality and MACE and 3-year outcomes are similar to the published data of LM CAD patients who undergo on-pump CABG.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12055-023-01526-3.

Project description:ImportanceThe FREEDOM trial demonstrated that among patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease, coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery resulted in lower rates of death and myocardial infarction but a higher risk of stroke when compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using drug-eluting stents. Whether there are treatment differences in health status, as assessed from the patient's perspective, is unknown.ObjectivesTo compare the relative effects of CABG vs PCI using drug-eluting stents on health status among patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease.Design, setting, and participantsBetween 2005 and 2010, 1900 patients from 18 countries with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease were randomized to undergo either CABG surgery (n = 947) or PCI (n = 953) as an initial treatment strategy. Of these, a total of 1880 patients had baseline health status assessed (935 CABG, 945 PCI) and comprised the primary analytic sample.InterventionsInitial revascularization with CABG surgery or PCI.Main outcomes and measuresHealth status was assessed using the angina frequency, physical limitations, and quality-of-life domains of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire at baseline, at 1, 6, and 12 months, and annually thereafter. For each scale, scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores representing better health. The effect of CABG surgery vs PCI was evaluated using longitudinal mixed-effect models.ResultsAt baseline, mean (SD) scores for the angina frequency, physical limitations, and quality-of-life subscales of the Seattle Angina Questionnaire were 70.9 (25.1), 67.3 (24.4), and 47.8 (25.0) for the CABG group and 71.4 (24.7), 69.9 (23.2), and 49.2 (25.7) for the PCI group, respectively. At 2-year follow-up, mean (SD) scores were 96.0 (11.9), 87.8 (18.7), and 82.2 (18.9) after CABG and 94.7 (14.3), 86.0 (19.3), and 80.4 (19.6) after PCI, with significantly greater benefit of CABG on each domain (mean treatment benefit, 1.3 [95% CI, 0.3-2.2], 4.4 [95% CI, 2.7-6.1], and 2.2 [95% CI, 0.7-3.8] points, respectively; P < .01 for each comparison). Beyond 2 years, the 2 revascularization strategies provided generally similar patient-reported outcomes.Conclusions and relevanceFor patients with diabetes and multivessel CAD, CABG surgery provided slightly better intermediate-term health status and quality of life than PCI using drug-eluting stents. The magnitude of benefit was small, without consistent differences beyond 2 years, in part due to the higher rate of repeat revascularization with PCI.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00086450.

Dataset Information

Impact of time factor and patient characteristics on the efficacy of PCI vs CABG for left main coronary disease: A meta-analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Impact of time factor and patient characteristics on the efficacy of PCI vs CABG for left main coronary disease: A meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets