Dataset Information

Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: A One-Stage Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background and aims

Data are emerging on 10-year mortality comparing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting for multivessel disease (MVD) without left main (LM) involvement. We conducted an updated two-stage meta-analysis using reconstructed individual patient data to compare long-term mortality between CABG and PCI for patients with MVD without significant LM coronary disease.

Methods

Medline and Embase databases were searched for articles comparing CABG with PCI for MVD. A two-stage meta-analysis was conducted using reconstructed patient level survival data for all-cause mortality with subgroups by SYNTAX score. The shared-frailty and stratified Cox models were fitted to compare survival endpoints.

Results

We screened 1,496 studies and included six randomized controlled trials with 7,181 patients. PCI was associated with greater 10-year all-cause mortality risk (HR: 1.282, CI: 1.118-1.469, p < 0.001) compared with CABG. In patients with low SYNTAX score, 10-year all-cause mortality after PCI was comparable to CABG (HR: 1.102, 0.822-1.479, p = 0.516). However, in patients with moderate to high SYNTAX score, 10-year all-cause mortality was significantly higher after PCI compared with CABG (HR: 1.444, 1.122-1.858, p < 0.001; HR: 1.856, 1.380-2.497, p < 0.001, respectively).

Conclusion

This updated reconstructed individual patient-data meta-analysis revealed a sustained lower cumulative all-cause mortality of CABG over PCI for multivessel disease without LM involvement.

SUBMITTER: Chew NWS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8990308 | biostudies-literature | 2022

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: A One-Stage Meta-Analysis.

Chew Nicholas W S NWS Koh Jin Hean JH Ng Cheng Han CH Tan Darren Jun Hao DJH Yong Jie Ning JN Lin Chaoxing C Lim Oliver Zi-Hern OZ Chin Yip Han YH Lim Denzel Ming Wei DMW Chan Koo Hui KH Loh Poay-Huan PH Low Adrian A Lee Chi-Hang CH Tan Huay-Cheem HC Chan Mark M

Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine 20220325

<h4>Background and aims</h4>Data are emerging on 10-year mortality comparing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting for multivessel disease (MVD) without left main (LM) involvement. We conducted an updated two-stage meta-analysis using reconstructed individual patient data to compare long-term mortality between CABG and PCI for patients with MVD without significant LM coronary disease.<h4>Methods</h4>Medline and Embase databases were sea ...[more]

PMID: 35402572

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundShort-term and long-term comparative outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for multivessel coronary artery (MVCA) or left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease are highly debated.GoalsWe performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the difference between PCI and CABG for the treatment of patients with MVCA or LMCA in long-term follow-up.MethodsLiteratures were searched in PubMed, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library from January 1, 2000 to January 1, 2021, including RCTs and observational studies (OSs). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 10 years follow-up, and the secondary outcomes included cardiac mortality, repeated revascularization, myocardial infarction, and stroke.ResultsA total of 5 RCTs reporting data from 3013 participants and 4 OSs of 5608 participants were included for analysis. There was no significant difference between PCI and CABG in all-cause mortality (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.03 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.19]), whereas PCI was associated with higher cardiac mortality (OR 0.76 [95% CI 0.65 to 0.90]) and repeated revascularization rate comparing to CABG (OR 1.77 [95% CI 1.08 to 2.89]; I2 = 94.61%). The difference between PCI and CABG in repeated revascularization in either RCTs or OSs, in myocardial infarction in either RCTs or OSs were not significant. In OSs, stroke rate in PCI group was lower than those in CABG, but not in RCTs. There was a significant increase of stroke rate in CABG comparing to PCI (OR 0.65 [95% CI 0.53 to 0.80]; I2 = 0.00%). No significant difference between PCI and CABG in myocardial infarction was not observed (OR 0.92 [95% CI 0.64 to 1.31]; I2 = 57.84%).ConclusionEvidence from our study and prior studies suggested the superiority of CABG over PCI in improving 5- but not 10-year survival among patients with MVCA. In the contrast, there was no significant difference between CABG and PCI for treating patients with LMCA in either 5- or 10-year survival rate. More long-term trials are needed to better define differences of outcome between 2 techniques.

Project description:Large number of patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) need repeat revascularization yearly, and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the optimal treatment strategy for such patients. However, it is still controversial whether PCI of native coronary artery or bypass graft is more beneficial. The aim of the study was to compare the clinical outcomes between native coronary artery vs. bypass graft PCI in patients with prior CABG. A total of 1,276 patients with prior CABG who underwent index PCI of native coronary artery (n=1,072) or bypass graft (n=204) were retrospectively examined. Patients were divided into native group and graft group according to the target vessel. The outcomes of the two groups were compared by using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and Cox regression analysis. The primary endpoint was the composite of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), which included all-cause death, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR). Compared with native group, patients in graft group had higher risk of slow-flow/no-reflow phenomenon (1.5% vs. 0.1%, P=0.011 before IPTW, and 2.2% vs. 0.1%, P<0.001 after IPTW) and peri-procedural stroke (0.3% vs. 0, P=0.021 after IPTW). During a median follow-up period of 43 months, there was similar risk of MACCE between two groups. Notably, patients in graft group had a significantly higher incidence of non-fatal MI compared with native group regardless with or without IPTW (7.8% vs. 3.8%, P=0.018 and 8.3% vs. 3.9%, P=0.030, separately). After adjusting for confounding by using Cox regression, bypass graft PCI was associated with a higher risk of non-fatal MI (HR: 2.091, 95% CI: 1.069-4.089; P=0.031), but similar results in MACCE (HR: 1.077, 95% CI: 0.817-1.419; P=0.599) compared with native group. This study found that native coronary artery might be preferred for PCI in patients with prior CABG because of lower rates of slow-flow/no-reflow, peri-procedural stroke, and non-fatal MI at follow-up.

Dataset Information

Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: A One-Stage Meta-Analysis.

Background and aims

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: A One-Stage Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets