A systematic review and meta-analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention compared to coronary artery bypass grafting in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome

An updated meta-analysis of optimal medical therapy with or without invasive therapy in patients with stable coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of optimal medical therapy (OMT) with or without revascularization therapy in patients with stable coronary artery disease (SCAD) remains controversial. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared OMT with or without revascularization therapy for SCAD patients.

METHODS

Studies were searched in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials from January 1, 2005, to December 30, 2023. The main efficacy outcome was a composite of all-cause death, myocadiac infarction, revascularization, and cerebrovascular accident. Results were pooled using random effects model and fixed effects model and are presented as odd ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Ten studies involving 12,790 participants were included. The arm of OMT with revascularization compared with OMT alone was associated with decreased risks for MACCE (OR 0.55 [95% CI 0.38-0.80], I²=93%, P = 0.002), CV death (OR 0.84 [95% CI 0.73-0.97], I²=36%, P = 0.02), revascularization (OR 0.32 [95% CI 0.20-0.50], I²=92%, P < 0.001), and MI (OR 0.85 [95% CI 0.76-0.96], I²=45%, P = 0.007). While there was no significant difference between OMT with revascularization and OMT alone in the odds of all-cause death (OR 0.94 [95% CI 0.84-1.05], I²=0%, P = 0.30).

CONCLUSIONS

The current updated meta-analysis of 10 RCTs shows that in patients with SCAD, OMT with revascularization would reduce the risk for MACCE, cardiovascular death, and MI. However, the invasive strategy does not decrease the risks for all-cause mortality when comparing with OMT alone.

Routine Stress Testing After PCI in Patients With and Without Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Secondary Analysis of the POST-PCI Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

The appropriate follow-up surveillance strategy for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains unknown.

Objective

To assess clinical outcomes in patients with and without ACS who have undergone high-risk PCI according to a follow-up strategy of routine stress testing at 12 months after PCI vs standard care alone.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The POST-PCI (Pragmatic Trial Comparing Symptom-Oriented vs Routine Stress Testing in High-Risk Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial was a randomized clinical trial that compared follow-up strategies of routine functional testing vs standard care alone 12 months after high-risk PCI. Patients were categorized as presenting with or without ACS. Patients were enrolled in the trial from November 2017 through September 2019, and patients were randomized from 11 sites in South Korea; data analysis was performed in 2022.

Intervention

Patients categorized as presenting with or without ACS were randomized to either a routine functional testing or standard care alone follow-up strategy 12 months after high-risk PCI.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina at 2 years following randomization. Kaplan-Meier event rates through 2 years and Cox model hazard ratios (HRs) were generated, and interactions were tested.

Results

Of 1706 included patients, 350 patients (20.5%) were female, and the mean (SD) patient age was 64.7 (10.3) years. In total, 526 patients (30.8%) presented with ACS. Compared with those without ACS, patients with ACS had a 55% greater risk of the primary outcome (HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.03-2.33; P = .03) due to higher event rates in the first year. The 2-year incidences of the primary outcome were similar between strategies of routine functional testing or standard care alone in patients with ACS (functional testing: 16 of 251 [6.6%]; standard care: 23 of 275 [8.5%]; HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.40-1.44; P = .39) and in patients without ACS (functional testing: 30 of 598 [5.1%]; standard care: 28 of 582 [4.9%]; HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.62-1.74; P = .88) (P for interaction for ACS = .45). Although a landmark analysis suggested that the rates of invasive angiography and repeat revascularization were higher after 1 year in the routine functional testing group, the formal interactions between ACS status and either invasive angiography or repeat revascularization were not significant.

Conclusion and Relevance

Despite being at higher risk for adverse clinical events in the first year after PCI than patients without ACS, patients with ACS who had undergone high-risk PCI did not derive incremental benefit from routine surveillance stress testing at 12 months compared with standard care alone during follow-up.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03217877.

Cardiac Surgery 2022 Reviewed

PubMed displayed almost 37,000 hits for the search term "cardiac surgery AND 2022." As before, we used the PRISMA approach and selected relevant publications for a results-oriented summary. We focused on coronary and conventional valve surgery, their overlap with interventional alternatives, and briefly assessed surgery for aorta or terminal heart failure. In the field of coronary artery disease (CAD), key manuscripts addressed prognostic implications of invasive treatment options, classically compared modern interventions (percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]) with surgery (coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]), and addressed technical aspects of CABG. The general direction in 2022 confirms the superiority of CABG over PCI in patients with anatomically complex chronic CAD and supports an infarct-preventative effect as underlying mechanism. In addition, the relevance of proper surgical technique to achieve durable graft patency and the need for optimal medical treatment in CABG patients was impressively illustrated. In structural heart disease, the comparisons of interventional and surgical techniques have been characterized by prognostic and mechanistic investigations underscoring the need for durable treatment effects and reductions of valve-related complications. Early surgery for most valve pathologies appears to provide significant survival advantages, and two publications on the Ross operation prototypically illustrate an inverse association between long-term survival and valve-related complications. For surgical treatment of heart failure, the first xenotransplantation was certainly dominant, and in the aortic surgery field, innovations in arch surgery prevailed. This article summarizes publications perceived as important by us. It cannot be complete nor free of individual interpretation, but provides up-to-date information for decision-making and patient information.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention vs Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery for Left Main Disease in Patients With and Without Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Pooled Analysis of 4 Randomized Clinical Trials

Importance

Patients with left main coronary artery disease presenting with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) represent a high-risk and understudied subgroup of patients with atherosclerosis.

Objective

To assess clinical outcomes after PCI vs CABG in patients with left main disease with vs without ACS.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Data were pooled from 4 trials comparing PCI with drug-eluting stents vs CABG in patients with left main disease who were considered equally suitable candidates for either strategy (SYNTAX, PRECOMBAT, NOBLE, and EXCEL). Patients were categorized as presenting with or without ACS. Kaplan-Meier event rates through 5 years and Cox model hazard ratios were generated, and interactions were tested. Patients were enrolled in the individual trials from 2004 through 2015. Individual patient data from the trials were pooled and reconciled from 2020 to 2021, and the analyses pertaining to the ACS subgroup were performed from March 2022 through February 2023.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was death through 5 years. Secondary outcomes included cardiovascular death, spontaneous myocardial infarction (MI), procedural MI, stroke, and repeat revascularization.

Results

Among 4394 patients (median [IQR] age, 66 [59-73] years; 3371 [76.7%] male and 1022 [23.3%] female) randomized to receive PCI or CABG, 1466 (33%) had ACS. Patients with ACS were more likely to have diabetes, prior MI, left ventricular ejection fraction less than 50%, and higher SYNTAX scores. At 30 days, patients with ACS had higher all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR], 3.40; 95% CI, 1.81-6.37; P < .001) and cardiovascular death (HR, 3.21; 95% CI, 1.69-6.08; P < .001) compared with those without ACS. Patients with ACS also had higher rates of spontaneous MI (HR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.25-2.31; P < .001) through 5 years. The rates of all-cause mortality through 5 years with PCI vs CABG were 10.9% vs 11.5% (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.68-1.27) in patients with ACS and 11.3% vs 9.6% (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.95-1.50) in patients without ACS (P = .22 for interaction). The risk of early stroke was lower with PCI vs CABG (ACS: HR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.12-1.25; no ACS: HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.16-0.75), whereas the 5-year risks of spontaneous MI and repeat revascularization were higher with PCI vs CABG (spontaneous MI: ACS: HR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.09-2.77; no ACS: HR, 3.03; 95% CI, 1.94-4.72; repeat revascularization: ACS: HR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.19-2.09; no ACS: HR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.54-2.33), regardless of ACS status.

Conclusion and Relevance

Among largely stable patients undergoing left main revascularization and with predominantly low to intermediate coronary anatomical complexity, those with ACS had higher rates of early death. Nonetheless, rates of all-cause mortality through 5 years were similar with PCI vs CABG in this high-risk subgroup. The relative advantages and disadvantages of PCI vs CABG in terms of early stroke and long-term spontaneous MI and repeat revascularization were consistent regardless of ACS status.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00114972, NCT00422968, NCT01496651, NCT01205776.

Evolving Management Paradigm for Stable Ischemic Heart Disease Patients: JACC Review Topic of the Week

Management of stable coronary artery disease (CAD) has been based on the assumption that flow-limiting atherosclerotic obstructions are the proximate cause of angina and myocardial ischemia in most patients and represent an important target for revascularization. However, the role of revascularization in reducing long-term cardiac events in these patients has been limited mainly to those with left main disease, 3-vessel disease with diabetes, or decreased ejection fraction. Mounting evidence indicates that nonepicardial coronary causes of angina and ischemia, including coronary microvascular dysfunction, vasospastic disorders, and derangements of myocardial metabolism, are more prevalent than flow-limiting stenoses, raising concerns that many important causes other than epicardial CAD are neither considered nor probed diagnostically. There is a need for a more inclusive management paradigm that uncouples the singular association between epicardial CAD and revascularization and better aligns diagnostic approaches that tailor treatment to the underlying mechanisms and precipitants of angina and ischemia in contemporary clinical practice.

Comparing CABG and PCI across the globe based on current regional registry evidence

There is an ongoing debate whether coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) provide better results for the treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD). We aimed to evaluate the impact of CABG or PCI on long-term survival based on local reports from different regions in the world. We systematically searched MEDLINE selecting studies that compared outcomes for CABG or PCI as a treatment for CAD in the last 10 years. Reports without all-cause mortality, multi-national cohorts, hybrid revascularization populations were excluded. Qualifying studies were statistically compared, and their geographic location visualized on a world map. From 5126 studies, one randomized and twenty-two observational studies (19 risk-adjusted) met the inclusion criteria. The mean follow-up was 4.7 ± 7 years and 18 different countries were included. In 17 studies, CABG was associated with better survival during follow-up, six studies showed no significant difference, and no study favored PCI. Periprocedural mortality was not different in seven, lower with PCI in one, lower with CABG in three and not reported in 12 studies. In regional registry-type comparisons, CABG is associated with better long-term survival compared to PCI in most regions of the world without evidence for higher periprocedural mortality.