Percutaneous coronary intervention added to optimal medical therapy does not convincingly improve mortality or myocardial infarction compared to medical therapy alone in chronic coronary syndromes.
Does percutaneous coronary intervention added to optimal medical therapy improve clinical outcomes in patients with chronic coronary syndromes?
In patients with chronic coronary syndromes, an initial conservative approach with optimal medical therapy is preferred as PCI has not been shown to improve hard clinical outcomes like mortality or MI.
Whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) when added to optimal medical therapy (OMT) improves clinical outcomes in patients with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) has been a continuing area of investigation for more than two decades. While myocardial revascularization, principally with PCI, has been the standard of care for patients with acute coronary syndromes because it improves survival and reduces recurrent myocardial infarction (MI),1,2 its role in patients with CCS is less clear.2,3 Although several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses indicate that OMT with PCI more effectively relieves angina, decreases the use of anti-anginal medications, and improves functional status and quality of life compared to OMT alone, none of these trials have demonstrated convincingly that an initial strategy of OMT + PCI improves ‘hard’ outcomes, including all-cause and cardiovascular mortality and MI during long-term follow-up.4–12 The recently reported results of the ISCHEMIA trial,13...
“The probability over 5.7 years that a patient's risk of dying is lower with the invasive strategy is nil, which means: Go with the patient's preference. Not undergoing revascularization is a reasonable strategy because there is no excess mortality.”
Boden et al. (Wed,) conducted a review in Chronic coronary syndromes (CCS). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) added to optimal medical therapy (OMT) vs. Optimal medical therapy (OMT) alone was evaluated. Percutaneous coronary intervention added to optimal medical therapy does not convincingly improve mortality or myocardial infarction compared to medical therapy alone in chronic coronary syndromes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: