Key result
Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty reduced angina compared to medical treatment (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.50-0.98) but increased the risk of coronary artery bypass grafting.
Why the study?
Does percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty improve outcomes compared to medical treatment in patients with non-acute coronary artery disease?
Population
1,904 patients with non-acute coronary artery disease from 6 RCTs
Comparison
Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty vs Medical treatment
Design
Meta-analysis
Authors
Loading...
PTCA may be considered for refractory angina in stable CAD; confirms higher CABG rates limit broader outcome benefits versus medical therapy.
Meta-Analysis (n=1,904)
Yes
Does percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty improve outcomes compared to medical treatment in patients with non-acute coronary artery disease?
Effect estimate: RR 0.70 (95% CI 0.50-0.98)
In patients with non-acute coronary artery disease, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty reduces angina compared to medical therapy but increases the need for subsequent coronary artery bypass grafting.
Heiner C. Bucher (2000) conducted a meta-analysis in Non-acute coronary artery disease (n=1,904). Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty vs. Medical treatment was evaluated on Angina (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.50-0.98). Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty reduced angina compared to medical treatment (RR 0.70; 95% CI 0.50-0.98) but increased the risk of coronary artery bypass grafting.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: