Dataset Information

Does prior coronary angioplasty affect outcomes of surgical coronary revascularization? Insights from the STICH trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:The STICH trial showed superiority of coronary artery bypass plus medical treatment (CABG) over medical treatment alone (MED) in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ?35%. In previous publications, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) prior to CABG was associated with worse prognosis. OBJECTIVES:The main purpose of this study was to analyse if prior PCI influenced outcomes in STICH. METHODS AND RESULTS:Patients in the STICH trial (n?=?1212), followed for a median time of 9.8?years, were included in the present analyses. In the total population, 156 had a prior PCI (74 and 82, respectively, in the MED and CABG groups). In those with vs. without prior PCI, the adjusted hazard-ratios (aHRs) were 0.92 (95% CI?=?0.74-1.15) for all-cause mortality, 0.85 (95% CI?=?0.64-1.11) for CV mortality, and 1.43 (95% CI?=?1.15-1.77) for CV hospitalization. In the group randomized to CABG without prior PCI, the aHRs were 0.82 (95% CI?=?0.70-0.95) for all-cause mortality, 0.75 (95% CI?=?0.62-0.90) for CV mortality and 0.67 (95% CI?=?0.56-0.80) for CV hospitalization. In the group randomized to CABG with prior PCI, the aHRs were 0.76 (95% CI?=?0.50-1.15) for all-cause mortality, 0.81 (95% CI?=?0.49-1.36) for CV mortality and 0.61 (95% CI?=?0.41-0.90) for CV hospitalization. There was no evidence of interaction between randomized treatment and prior PCI for any endpoint (all adjusted p?>?0.05). CONCLUSION:In the STICH trial, prior PCI did not affect the outcomes of patients whether they were treated medically or surgically, and the superiority of CABG over MED remained unchanged regardless of prior PCI. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov; Identifier: NCT00023595.

SUBMITTER: Nicolau JC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6579621 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Does prior coronary angioplasty affect outcomes of surgical coronary revascularization? Insights from the STICH trial.

Nicolau Jose C JC Stevens Susanna R SR Al-Khalidi Hussein R HR Jatene Fabio B FB Furtado Remo H M RHM Dallan Luis A O LAO Lisboa Luiz A F LAF Desvigne-Nickens Patrice P Haddad Haissam H Jolicoeur E Marc EM Petrie Mark C MC Doenst Torsten T Michler Robert E RE Ohman E Magnus EM Maddury Jyotsna J Ali Imtiaz I Deja Marek A MA Rouleau Jean L JL Velazquez Eric J EJ Hill James A JA

International journal of cardiology 20190315

<h4>Background</h4>The STICH trial showed superiority of coronary artery bypass plus medical treatment (CABG) over medical treatment alone (MED) in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%. In previous publications, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) prior to CABG was associated with worse prognosis.<h4>Objectives</h4>The main purpose of this study was to analyse if prior PCI influenced outcomes in STICH.<h4>Methods and results</h4>Patients in the STICH trial (n = 1212) ...[more]

PMID: 30929973

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Female sex is conventionally considered a risk factor for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and has been included as a poor prognostic factor in multiple cardiac operative risk evaluation scores. We aimed to investigate the association of sex and the long-term benefit of CABG in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction enrolled in the prospective STICH trial (Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure Study). METHODS:The STICH trial randomized 1212 patients (148 [12%] women and 1064 [88%] men) with coronary artery disease and left ventricular ejection fraction ?35% to CABG+medical therapy (MED) versus MED alone. Long-term (10-year) outcomes with each treatment were compared according to sex. RESULTS:At baseline, women were older (63.4 versus 59.3 years; P=0.016) with higher body mass index (27.9 versus 26.7 kg/m2; P=0.001). Women had more coronary artery disease risk factors (diabetes mellitus, 55.4% versus 37.2%; hypertension, 70.9% versus 58.6%; hyperlipidemia, 70.3% versus 58.9%) except for smoking (13.5% versus 21.8%) and had lower rates of prior CABG (0% versus 3.4%; all P<0.05) than men. Moreover, women had higher New York Heart Association class (class III/IV, 66.2% versus 57.0%), lower 6-minute walk capacity (300 versus 350 m), and lower Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary scores (51 versus 63; all P<0.05). Over 10 years of follow-up, all-cause mortality (49.0% versus 65.8%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.86; P=0.002) and cardiovascular mortality (34.3% versus 52.3%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.89; P=0.006) were significantly lower in women compared with men. With randomization to CABG+MED versus MED treatment, there was no significant interaction between sex and treatment group in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or the composite of all-cause mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization (all P>0.05). In addition, surgical deaths were not statistically different (1.5% versus 5.1%; P=0.187) between sexes among patients randomized to CABG per protocol as initial treatment. CONCLUSIONS:Sex is not associated with the effect of CABG+MED versus MED on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, the composite of death or cardiovascular hospitalization, or surgical deaths in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. Thus, sex should not influence treatment decisions about CABG in these patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00023595.

Project description:Aims:Hypertension (HTN) is a well-known contributor to cardiovascular disease, including heart failure (HF) and coronary artery disease, and is the leading risk factor for premature death world-wide. A J- or U-shaped relationship has been suggested between blood pressure (BP) and clinical outcomes in different studies. However, there is little information about the significance of BP on the outcomes of patients with coronary artery disease and left ventricular dysfunction. This study aimed to determine the relationship between BP and mortality outcomes in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy. Methods and results:The influence of BP during a median follow-up of 9.8 years was studied in a total of 1212 patients with ejection fraction ≤35% and coronary disease amenable to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) who were randomized to CABG or medical therapy alone (MED) in the STICH (Surgical Treatment for Ischaemic Heart Failure) trial. Landmark analyses were performed starting at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years after randomization, in which previous systolic BP values were averaged and related to subsequent mortality through the end of follow-up with a median of 9.8 years. Neither a previous history of HTN nor baseline BP had any significant influence on long-term mortality outcomes, nor did they have a significant interaction with MED or CABG treatment. The landmark analyses showed a progressive U-shaped relationship that became strongest at 5 years (χ2 and P-values: 7.08, P = 0.069; 8.72, P = 0.033; 9.86; P = 0.020; 8.31, P = 0.040; 14.52, P = 0.002; at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5-year landmark analyses, respectively). The relationship between diastolic BP (DBP) and outcomes was similar. The most favourable outcomes were observed in the SBP range 120-130, and DBP 75-85 mmHg, whereas lower and higher BP were associated with worse outcomes. There were no differences in BP-lowering medications between groups. Conclusion:A strong U-shaped relationship between BP and mortality outcomes was evident in ischaemic HF patients. The results imply that the optimal SBP might be in the range 120-130 mmHg after intervention, and possibly be subject to pharmacologic action regarding high BP. Further, low BP was a marker of poor outcomes that might require other interactions and treatment strategies. Clinical Trial Registration:URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00023595.

Project description:Rosiglitazone improves glycemic control for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, but there remains controversy regarding an observed association with cardiovascular hazard. The cardiovascular effects of rosiglitazone for patients with coronary artery disease remain unknown.To examine any association between rosiglitazone use and cardiovascular events among patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease, we analyzed events among 2368 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial. Total mortality, composite death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, and the individual incidence of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, congestive heart failure, and fractures, were compared during 4.5 years of follow-up among patients treated with rosiglitazone versus patients not receiving a thiazolidinedione by use of Cox proportional hazards and Kaplan-Meier analyses that included propensity matching. After multivariable adjustment, among patients treated with rosiglitazone, mortality was similar (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-1.18), whereas there was a lower incidence of composite death, myocardial infarction, and stroke (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55-0.93) and stroke (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.16-0.86) and a higher incidence of fractures (HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.05-2.51); the incidence of myocardial infarction (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.54-1.10) and congestive heart failure (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.84-1.82) did not differ significantly. Among propensity-matched patients, rates of major ischemic cardiovascular events and congestive heart failure were not significantly different.Among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease in the BARI 2D trial, neither on-treatment nor propensity-matched analysis supported an association of rosiglitazone treatment with an increase in major ischemic cardiovascular events.URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00006305.

Project description:BackgroundThe economic outcomes of clinical management strategies are important in assessing their value to patients.Methods and resultsBypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) randomized patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and angiographically documented, stable coronary disease to strategies of (1) prompt revascularization versus medical therapy with delayed revascularization as needed to relieve symptoms and (2) insulin sensitization versus insulin provision. Before randomization, the physician declared whether coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention would be used if the patient were assigned to revascularization. We followed 2005 patients for medical utilization and costs and assessed the cost-effectiveness of these management strategies. Medical costs were higher for revascularization than medical therapy, with a significant interaction with the intended method of revascularization (P<0.0001). In the coronary artery bypass grafting stratum, 4-year costs were $80 900 for revascularization versus $60 600 for medical therapy (P<0.0001). In the percutaneous coronary intervention stratum, costs were $73 400 for revascularization versus $67 800 for medical therapy (P<0.02). Costs also were higher for insulin sensitization ($71 300) versus insulin provision ($70 200). Other factors that significantly (P<0.05) and independently increased cost included insulin use and dose at baseline, female sex, white race, body mass index > or =30, and albuminuria. Cost-effectiveness based on 4-year data favored the strategy of medical therapy over prompt revascularization and the strategy of insulin provision over insulin sensitization. Lifetime projections of cost-effectiveness showed that medical therapy was cost-effective compared with revascularization in the percutaneous coronary intervention stratum ($600 per life-year added) with high confidence. Lifetime projections suggest that revascularization may be cost-effective in the coronary artery bypass grafting stratum ($47 000 per life-year added) but with lower confidence.ConclusionsPrompt coronary revascularization significantly increases costs among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and stable coronary disease. The strategy of medical therapy (with delayed revascularization as needed) appears to be cost-effective compared with the strategy of prompt coronary revascularization among patients identified a priori as suitable for percutaneous coronary intervention.

Project description:AimOptimal revascularization strategy in multivessel (MV) coronary artery disease (CAD) eligible for percutaneous management (PCI) and surgery remains unresolved. We evaluated, in a randomized clinical trial, residual myocardial ischemia (RI) and clinical outcomes of MV-CAD revascularization using coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR), or MV-PCI.MethodsConsecutive MV-CAD patients (n = 155) were randomized (1 : 1 : 1) to conventional CABG (LIMA-LAD plus venous grafts) or HCR (MIDCAB LIMA-LAD followed by PCI for remaining vessels) or MV-PCI (everolimus-eluting CoCr stents) under Heart Team agreement on equal technical and clinical feasibility of each strategy. SPECT at 12 months (primary endpoint of RI that the trial was powered for; a measure of revascularization midterm efficacy and an independent predictor of long-term prognosis) preceded routine angiographic control.ResultsData are given, respectively, for the CABG, HCR, and MV-PCI arms. Incomplete revascularization rate was 8.0% vs. 7.7% vs. 5.7% (p=0.71). Hospital stay was 13.8 vs. 13.5 vs. 4.5 days (p < 0.001), and sick-leave duration was 23 vs. 16 vs. 8 weeks (p < 0.001). At 12 months, RI was 5 (2, 9)% vs. 5 (3, 7)% vs. 6 (3, 10)% (median; Q1, Q3) with noninferiority p values of 0.0006 (HCR vs. CABG) and 0.016 (MV-PCI vs. CABG). Rates of angiographic graft stenosis/occlusion or in-segment restenosis were 20.4% vs. 8.2% vs. 5.9% (p=0.05). Clinical target vessel/graft failure occurred in 12.0% vs. 11.5% vs. 11.3% (p=0.62). Major adverse cardiac and cerebral event (MACCE) rate was similar (12% vs. 13.4% vs. 13.2%; p=0.83).ConclusionIn this first randomized controlled study comparing CABG, HCR, and MV-PCI, residual myocardial ischemia and MACCE were similar at 12 months. There was no midterm indication of any added value of HCR. Hospital stay and sick-leave duration were shortest with MV-PCI. While longer-term follow-up is warranted, these findings may impact patient and physician choices and healthcare resources utilization. This trial is registered with NCT01699048.

Dataset Information

Does prior coronary angioplasty affect outcomes of surgical coronary revascularization? Insights from the STICH trial.

Publications

Does prior coronary angioplasty affect outcomes of surgical coronary revascularization? Insights from the STICH trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets