Dataset Information

Meta-analysis study comparing percutaneous coronary intervention/drug eluting stent versus coronary artery bypass surgery of unprotected left main coronary artery disease: Clinical outcomes during short-term versus long-term (> 1 year) follow-up.

ABSTRACT: 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?

SUBMITTER: Ali WE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5839846 | biostudies-other | 2018 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Meta-analysis study comparing percutaneous coronary intervention/drug eluting stent versus coronary artery bypass surgery of unprotected left main coronary artery disease: Clinical outcomes during short-term versus long-term (> 1 year) follow-up.

Ali Waleed E WE Vaidya Satyanarayana R SR Ejeh Sylvester U SU Okoroafor Kingsley U KU

Medicine 20180201 7

<h4>Background</h4>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 observa ...[more]

PMID: 29443766

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCoronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery has traditionally represented the standard of care for left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. However, percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation (PCI) has more recently emerged as a valuable alternative. The long-time awaited results of the largest randomized trials on the long-term impact of PCI versus CABG in LMCA disease, the newly published NOBLE and EXCEL studies, revealed contrasting results. Thus, aim of the present meta-analysis was to review the most robust evidence from randomized comparisons of CABG versus PCI for revascularization of LMCA.MethodsRandomized studies comparing long-term clinical outcomes of CABG or Stent-PCI for the treatment of LMCA disease were searched for in PubMed, the Chochrane Library and Scopus electronic databases. A total of 5 randomized studies were selected, including 4499 patients.ResultsNo significant difference between CABG and PCI was found in the primary analysis on the composite endpoint of death, stroke and myocardial infarction (OR = 1·06 95% CI 0·80-1·40; p = 0·70). Similarly, no differences were observed between CABG and PCI for all-cause death (OR = 1·03 95% CI 0·81-1·32; p = 0·81). Although not statistically significant, a lower rate of stroke was registered in the PCI arm (OR = 0·86; p = 0·67), while a lower rate of myocardial infarction was found in the CABG arm (OR = 1·43; p = 0·17). On the contrary, a significantly higher rate of repeat revascularization was registered in the PCI arm (OR = 1·76 95% CI 1·45-2·13; p < 0·001).ConclusionsThe present meta-analysis, the most comprehensive and updated to date, including 5 randomized studies and 4499 patients, demonstrates no difference between Stent-PCI and CABG for the treatment of LMCA disease in the composite endpoint of death, stroke and myocardial infarction. Hence, a large part of patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease can be managed equally well by means of both these revascularization strategies.

Project description:Rationale & objectiveWe aimed to study the comparative effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent and coronary artery bypass grafting in patients receiving dialysis.Study designThis was a retrospective observational cohort study.Setting & participantsThis population-based study identified patients receiving dialysis hospitalized for coronary revascularization between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2015, in the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database.ExposuresPatients received percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent versus coronary artery bypass grafting.OutcomesThe study outcomes were all-cause mortality, in-hospital mortality, and repeat revascularization.Analytical approachPropensity scores were used to match patients. Cox proportional hazards models and logistic regression models were constructed to examine associations between revascularization strategies and mortality. Interval Cox models were fitted to estimate time-varying hazards during different periods.ResultsA total of 1,840 propensity score-matched patients receiving dialysis were analyzed. Coronary artery bypass grafting was associated with higher in-hospital mortality (coronary artery bypass grafting vs percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent; crude mortality rate 12.5% vs 3.3%; adjusted OR, 5.22; 95% CI, 3.42-7.97; P < 0.001) and longer hospitalization duration (median [IQR], 20 [14-30] days vs 3 [2-8] days; P < 0.001). After discharge, repeat revascularization, acute coronary syndrome, and repeat hospitalization all occurred more frequently in the percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent group. Importantly, with a median follow-up of 2.8 years, coronary artery bypass grafting was significantly associated with a higher risk of all-cause overall mortality (adjusted HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.05-1.35; P = 0.006) in the multivariable Cox proportional hazard model. Sensitivity and subgroup analyses yielded consistent results.LimitationsThis was an observational study with mainly Asian ethnicity.ConclusionsPercutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent may be associated with better survival than coronary artery bypass grafting in patients receiving dialysis. Future studies are warranted to confirm this finding.

Dataset Information

Meta-analysis study comparing percutaneous coronary intervention/drug eluting stent versus coronary artery bypass surgery of unprotected left main coronary artery disease: Clinical outcomes during short-term versus long-term (> 1 year) follow-up.

Publications

Meta-analysis study comparing percutaneous coronary intervention/drug eluting stent versus coronary artery bypass surgery of unprotected left main coronary artery disease: Clinical outcomes during short-term versus long-term (> 1 year) follow-up.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets