Dataset Information

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus cardiac bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease: A trial sequential analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Several updated meta-analyses comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery disease (LM CAD) have been published recently. However, the risk of false-positive results could be high in conventional updated meta-analyses due to repetitive testing of accumulating data. Therefore, we compared these treatment approaches via trial sequential analysis (TSA).

Methods

The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or subgroups of RCTs comparing PCI and CABG in patients with LM CAD. The primary outcome was major cardiac and cerebrovascular adverse events (MACCE). TSA was used to confirm the conclusions derived from conventional meta-analysis.

Results

Six RCTs with 4700 patients were included. PCI was associated with a greater risk of MACCE compared with CABG (pooled relative risk [RR] 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-1.40, P?=?.008). In addition, PCI resulted in a significantly higher risk of revascularization than CABG (pooled RR 1.61, 95% CI: 1.33-1.95, P?32 (pooled RR 1.41, 95% CI: 1.12-1.76, P?=?.003), which was confirmed by the TSA. There was no difference in patients with a SYNTAX score from 0 to 32.

Conclusions

In patients with LM CAD, CABG may be better than PCI for reducing MACCE due to a reduced risk of revascularization. CABG remains the first choice for LM CAD patients with high anatomic complexity, while PCI could be an alternative for those with low-to-moderate anatomic complexity.

SUBMITTER: Ye Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5662302 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus cardiac bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease: A trial sequential analysis.

Ye Yicong Y Yang Ming M Zhang Shuyang S Zeng Yong Y

Medicine 20171001 41

<h4>Background</h4>Several updated meta-analyses comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery disease (LM CAD) have been published recently. However, the risk of false-positive results could be high in conventional updated meta-analyses due to repetitive testing of accumulating data. Therefore, we compared these treatment approaches via trial sequential analysis (TSA).<h4>Methods</h4>The MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane ...[more]

PMID: 29019879

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceIn patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been the standard therapy for several decades. However, some studies suggest that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents may be an acceptable alternative.ObjectiveTo compare the long-term safety of PCI with drug-eluting stent vs CABG in patients with LMCA stenosis.Data sourcesPubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Knowledge, and ScienceDirect databases were searched from December 18, 2001, to February 1, 2017. Inclusion criteria were randomized clinical trial, patients with LMCA stenosis, PCI vs CABG, exclusive use of drug-eluting stents, and clinical follow-up of 3 or more years.Data extraction and synthesisTrial-level hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were pooled by fixed-effect and random-effects models with inverse variance weighting. Time-to-event individual patient data for the primary end point were reconstructed. Sensitivity analyses according to drug-eluting stent generation and coronary artery disease complexity were performed.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at long-term follow-up. Secondary end points included repeat revascularization and a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization at long-term follow-up.ResultsA total of 4 randomized clinical trials were pooled; 4394 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 3371 (76.7%) were men; pooled mean age was 65.4 years. According to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation, evidence quality with respect to the primary composite end point was high. Percutaneous coronary intervention and CABG were associated with a comparable risk of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke both by fixed-effect (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.90-1.24; P = .48) and random-effects (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.85-1.32; P = .60) analysis. Sensitivity analyses according to low to intermediate Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) score (random-effects: HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.74-1.41; P = .89) and drug-eluting stent generation (first generation: HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.68-1.20; P = .49; second generation: HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.82-1.73; P = .36) were consistent. Kaplan-Meier curve reconstruction did not show significant variations over time between the techniques, with a 5-year incidence of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke of 18.3% (319 events) in patients treated with PCI and 16.9% (292 events) in patients treated with CABG. However, repeat revascularization after PCI was increased (HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.42-2.05; P < .001). Other individual secondary end points did not differ significantly between groups. Finally, pooled estimates of trials with LMCA stenosis tended overall to differ significantly from those of trials with multivessel coronary artery disease without left main LMCA stenosis.Conclusions and relevancePercutaneous coronary intervention and CABG show comparable safety in patients with LMCA stenosis and low to intermediate-complexity coronary artery disease. However, repeat revascularization is more common after PCI.

Project description:Results on the safety and long-term efficacy of drug-eluting stent placement in unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCAD) compared with those of coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) remain inconsistent across randomized clinical trials and recent meta-analysis studies. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and safety over short- and long-term follow-ups by conducting a meta-analysis of large pooled data from randomized controlled trials and up-to-date observational studies.A systematic review of PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, and reference lists of related articles was performed for studies conducted in the drug-eluting stent era, to compare percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with CABG in ULMCAD. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, all-cause mortality, and revascularization after at least 1-year follow-up. In-hospital and 30-day clinical outcomes were considered secondary outcomes. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis of studies with ?5 years follow-up was performed to test the sustainability of clinical outcomes.A total of 29 studies were extracted with 21,832 patients (10,424 in PCI vs 11,408 in CABG). Pooled analysis demonstrated remarkable differences in long-term follow-up (?1 year) MACCE (odds ratio [OR] 1.42, 95% CI 1.27-1.59), P?<?.00001), repeat revascularization (OR 3.00, 95% CI 2.41-3.73, P?<?.00001), and MI (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.14-1.53, P?=?.0002), favoring CABG over PCI. However, stroke risk was significantly lower in the PCI group. Subgroup analysis of studies with ?5 years follow-up showed similar outcomes except for the noninferiority outcome of MACCE in the PCI arm. However, the PCI group proved good safety profile after a minimum of 30-day follow-up with lower MACCE outcome.PCI for ULMCAD can be applied with attentiveness in carefully selected patients. MI and the need for revascularization remain drawbacks and areas of concern among previous studies. Nonetheless, it has been proven safe during short-term follow-up.

Dataset Information

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus cardiac bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease: A trial sequential analysis.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Percutaneous coronary intervention versus cardiac bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease: A trial sequential analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets