» Articles » PMID: 32118272

Mortality After Drug-eluting Stents Vs. Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: a Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Abstract

Aims: The optimal method of revascularization for patients with left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) is controversial. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) has traditionally been considered the gold standard therapy, and recent randomized trials comparing CABG with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) have reported conflicting outcomes. We, therefore, performed a systematic review and updated meta-analysis comparing CABG to PCI with DES for the treatment of LMCAD.

Methods And Results: We systematically identified all randomized trials comparing PCI with DES vs. CABG in patients with LMCAD. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints included cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and unplanned revascularization. All analyses were by intention-to-treat. There were five eligible trials in which 4612 patients were randomized. The weighted mean follow-up duration was 67.1 months. There were no significant differences between PCI and CABG for the risk of all-cause mortality [relative risk (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81-1.32; P = 0.779] or cardiac death (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.79-1.34; P = 0.817). There were also no significant differences in the risk of stroke (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.35-1.50; P = 0.400) or MI (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.96-1.56; P = 0.110). Percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with an increased risk of unplanned revascularization (RR 1.73, 95% CI 1.49-2.02; P < 0.001).

Conclusion: The totality of randomized clinical trial evidence demonstrated similar long-term mortality after PCI with DES compared with CABG in patients with LMCAD. Nor were there significant differences in cardiac death, stroke, or MI between PCI and CABG. Unplanned revascularization procedures were less common after CABG compared with PCI. These findings may inform clinical decision-making between cardiologists, surgeons, and patients with LMCAD.

Citing Articles

Comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention vs coronary artery bypass graft for left main coronary artery disease in patients with prior cerebrovascular disease: A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression.

Shuja M, Shakil F, Ali S, Uddin Q, Noman A, Iqbal J Int J Cardiol Cardiovasc Risk Prev. 2025; 24:200370.

PMID: 39877074 PMC: 11772956. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcrp.2025.200370.


Left Main Disease and Bifurcation Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Focus on Antithrombotic Therapy.

Varlamos C, Lianos I, Benetou D, Alexopoulos D US Cardiol. 2024; 15:e11.

PMID: 39720505 PMC: 11664771. DOI: 10.15420/usc.2020.34.


What is New from the 2024 European Society of Cardiology Congress on the Management of Chronic Coronary Syndromes? Updated Guidelines and Trials.

Gurgoglione F, Niccoli G Eur Cardiol. 2024; 19:e23.

PMID: 39651114 PMC: 11622220. DOI: 10.15420/ecr.2024.43.


Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in left main disease according to patients' sex: A meta-analysis.

Meynet P, Improta R, Carbone M, Pecoraro M, Pagliassotto I, Di Pietro G Eur J Clin Invest. 2024; 55(2):e14348.

PMID: 39543458 PMC: 11744918. DOI: 10.1111/eci.14348.


Ticagrelor versus Clopidogrel in Patients with left main Coronary Artery Stenting.

Yan Y, Xu H, Zhao Y, Lin S, Zheng Y Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 2024; .

PMID: 39460906 DOI: 10.1007/s10557-024-07636-3.


References
1.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D . Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151(4):264-9, W64. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135. View

2.
Sarno G, Lagerqvist B, Frobert O, Nilsson J, Olivecrona G, Omerovic E . Lower risk of stent thrombosis and restenosis with unrestricted use of 'new-generation' drug-eluting stents: a report from the nationwide Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR). Eur Heart J. 2012; 33(5):606-13. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr479. View

3.
Freemantle N, Calvert M, Wood J, Eastaugh J, Griffin C . Composite outcomes in randomized trials: greater precision but with greater uncertainty?. JAMA. 2003; 289(19):2554-9. DOI: 10.1001/jama.289.19.2554. View

4.
Thuijs D, Kappetein A, Serruys P, Mohr F, Morice M, Mack M . Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial. Lancet. 2019; 394(10206):1325-1334. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31997-X. View

5.
Stone G, Sabik J, Serruys P, Simonton C, Genereux P, Puskas J . Everolimus-Eluting Stents or Bypass Surgery for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease. N Engl J Med. 2016; 375(23):2223-2235. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1610227. View