Key result
Percutaneous coronary intervention significantly increased the risk of native coronary artery disease progression at 5 years compared to coronary artery bypass grafting (HR 4.78).
Why the study?
Does PCI or CABG compared to medical therapy alone affect the angiographic progression of native coronary atherosclerosis in patients with stable multivessel CAD?
RCT (n=392)
Single-blind
Randomized
No
Does PCI or CABG compared to medical therapy alone affect the angiographic progression of native coronary atherosclerosis in patients with stable multivessel CAD?
Effect estimate: HR 4.779 (95% CI 2.526-9.043)
Absolute Event Rate: 84% vs 57%
p-value: p=<0.001
In patients with stable multivessel coronary artery disease, PCI is associated with significantly greater angiographic progression of native coronary atherosclerosis at 5 years compared to CABG or medical therapy alone.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
May favor CABG over PCI to limit native vessel progression in multivessel CAD; extends revascularization trials with 5-year angiographic data.
Borges et al. (2010) conducted an RCT in Stable multivessel coronary artery disease (n=392). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs. Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) was evaluated on Progression of native coronary artery disease in at least one vessel (HR 4.779, 95% CI 2.526-9.043, p=<0.001). Percutaneous coronary intervention significantly increased the risk of native coronary artery disease progression at 5 years compared to coronary artery bypass grafting (HR 4.78).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: