Debate: PCI or CABG for multivessel disease? Viewpoint: No clear winner in an unfair fight

Adverse events following percutaneous and surgical coronary revascularisation: Analysis of non-MACE outcomes in the Stent or Surgery (SoS) Trial

OBJECTIVES

To analyse adverse events requiring or prolonging hospitalisation in the Stent or Surgery (SoS) trial.

BACKGROUND

Many adverse events following coronary revascularisation are non-major adverse cardiovascular events (non-MACE). Trials comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) have reported rates of mortality and MACE only.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Comparisons between PCI and CABG groups in the SOS trial were by intention to treat. For patients with non-fatal/non-MACE, number of events per 100 patient years follow-up and duration of hospital stay were assessed. Competing risk analysis was used to illustrate temporal pattern of adverse outcomes.

RESULTS

During 2 y median follow up, 1 one or more adverse event occurred in 47.3% (231) of the PCI group and 53% (265) of the CABG group (p=0.086). Non-fatal/non-MACE occurred in 11.9% of the PCI group and 38.6% of the CABG group (p<0.001). Non-fatal/non-MACE per 100 patient years follow-up was 17.49 (PCI) and 35.04 (CABG), rate ratio 2.0, 95% CI 1.7 to 2.4, p<0.001. Cumulative non-fatal/non-MACE associated hospital stays were 1387 and 3287 days in PCI and CABG groups respectively. Median duration of hospitalisation per non-fatal/non-MACE was 5 days (interquartile range 2 to 11.75 days) in the PCI group and 6 days (interquartile range 2 to 12 days) in the CABG group, p=0.245.

CONCLUSIONS

CABG had lower cumulative incidence of fatal or MACE outcomes, higher cumulative incidence of non-fatal/non-MACE outcomes, and longer cumulative hospitalisation periods compared to the PCI group.

Increasing rates of angioplasty versus bypass surgery in Canada, 1994-2005

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is increasingly being offered to patients with coronary artery disease. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of this change in coronary revascularization strategy on PCI and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) utilization across Canada.

METHODS

All cases of PCI and isolated CABG between years 1994 and 2005 were identified through the Canadian Institute for Health Information. Age- and sex-standardized rates of PCI and CABG per 100,000 population as well as PCI-to-CABG ratios were calculated by year and province and across age, sex, income, diabetes, and recent acute coronary syndrome subgroups. In addition, risk-adjusted rates of in-hospital mortality after PCI and CABG were reported by year.

RESULTS

Between 1994 and 2005, PCI rates increased from 85.6/100,000 to 186.7/100,000 (P < .001), whereas CABG rates remained stable (75.6/100,000-70.8/100,000; P = .43), resulting in an increase in PCI-to-CABG ratio (1.13-2.64; P < .001). Significant increases in PCI-to-CABG ratios were seen across all provinces (except Newfoundland and Alberta), as well as across all age, sex, income, diabetes, and recent acute coronary syndrome categories. Decline in risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality was seen after both CABG (3.9%-2.2%; P < .001) and PCI (1.6%-1.3%; P < .001) but appeared larger after CABG.

CONCLUSIONS

Since 1994, rates of PCI have increased significantly as compared to CABG. During the same period, greater declines in risk-adjusted rates of in-hospital mortality were seen among CABG versus PCI patients. Further study is needed to determine the appropriateness of PCI and CABG rates in terms of clinical outcomes and resource utilization.

Efficacy and Safety of Drug-Eluting Stents: Current Best Available Evidence

The development of drug-eluting coronary stents has proved to be a quantum advance in interventional cardiology, rivaling the impact of stenting itself. Drug-eluting coronary stents deliver effective local concentrations of antiproliferative drugs (thus avoiding systemic toxicities), without substantially modifying the technique of percutaneous coronary intervention. Studies involving several different stent platforms and antiproliferative drug coatings have recently demonstrated dramatic reductions in restenosis rates, compared to conventional bare metal stents. Although the clinical benefits of drug-eluting stents are increasingly evident, important concerns about their long-term safety and costs have been raised. Furthermore, drug-eluting stents are being claimed to replace coronary artery bypass surgery in the near future. This review article evaluates the current best available evidence on the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stents with a focus on the impact of this "revolutionary" new technology on the practice of coronary artery bypass surgery.

Cost-effectiveness of bypass surgery versus stenting in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease

PURPOSE

To compare the cost-effectiveness of surgical and angioplasty-based coronary artery revascularization techniques, in particular, angioplasty with primary stenting.

METHODS

We used data from the Study of Economics and Quality of Life, a substudy of the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI), to measure the outcomes and costs of angioplasty and bypass surgery in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who had not undergone prior coronary artery revascularization. Using a Markov decision model, we updated the outcomes and costs to reflect technology changes since the time of enrollment in BARI, and projected the lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for the two procedures from the time of initial treatment through death. We accounted for the effects of improved procedural safety and efficiency, and prolonged therapeutic effects of both surgery and stenting. This study was conducted from a societal perspective.

RESULTS

Surgical revascularization was less costly and resulted in better outcomes than catheter-based intervention including stenting. It remained the preferred strategy after adjusting the stent outcomes to eliminate the costs and events associated with target lesion restenosis. Among angioplasty-based strategies, primary stent use cost an additional 189,000 US dollars per QALY gained compared with a strategy that reserved stent use for treatment of suboptimal balloon angioplasty results.

CONCLUSION

Bypass surgery results in better outcomes than angioplasty in patients with multivessel disease, and at a lower cost.

Debate: PCI vs CABG: a moving target, but we are gaining

The treatment of patients with coronary artery disease continues to evolve; all three strategies - medical therapy, surgical revascularization, and percutaneous coronary intervention - have changed. Medical therapy with intense risk-factor modification and treatment with a statin, aspirin, and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, should be used unless contraindicated. Surgical therapy has also changed with the introduction of minimally invasive, beating heart surgery. Percutaneous coronary intervention has perhaps changed the most radically with adjunctive therapy - glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, thienopyridines, and reliance on stent implantation. The future, with new distal protection devices and drug-coated stents, should continue to see increased numbers of patients who can benefit from percutaneous intervention.