Key result
Sirolimus-eluting stent PCI shows no difference in 5-year MACCE compared with CABG.
Why the study?
Does percutaneous coronary intervention with a sirolimus-eluting stent reduce major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis compared to coronary artery bypass grafting?
RCT (n=600)
Does percutaneous coronary intervention with a sirolimus-eluting stent reduce major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis compared to coronary artery bypass grafting?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
At 5 years, PCI with a sirolimus-eluting stent showed no significant difference in the composite of death, MI, stroke, or repeat revascularization compared to CABG for unprotected left main coronary artery disease, though PCI had higher rates of repeat revascularization.
BACKGROUND: In a previous randomized trial, we found that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was not inferior to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis at 1 year. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the 5-year outcomes of PCI compared with CABG for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis. METHODS: We randomly assigned 600 patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis to undergo PCI with a sirolimus-eluting stent (n = 300) or CABG (n = 300). The primary endpoint was a major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (MACCE: a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization) and compared on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: At 5 years, MACCE occurred in 52 patients in the PCI group and 42 patients in the CABG group (cumulative event rates of 17.5% and 14.3%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84 to 1.90; p = 0.26). The 2 groups did not differ significantly in terms of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or stroke as well as their composite (8.4% and 9.6%; HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.52; p = 0.66). Ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization occurred more frequently in the PCI group than in the CABG group (11.4% and 5.5%, respectively; HR: 2.11; 95% CI: 1.16 to 3.84; p = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: During 5 years of follow-up, our study did not show significant difference regarding the rate of MACCE between patients who underwent PCI with a sirolimus-eluting stent and those who underwent CABG. However, considering the limited power of our study, our results should be interpreted with caution. (Bypass Surgery Versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease [PRECOMBAT]; NCT00422968).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ahn et al. (2015) conducted an RCT in unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis (n=600). PCI with a sirolimus-eluting stent vs. CABG was evaluated on major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (MACCE: a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization) (HR 1.27, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.90, p=0.26). PCI with a sirolimus-eluting stent did not significantly differ from CABG for the 5-year rate of MACCE (17.5% vs 14.3%; HR 1.27; 95% CI 0.84-1.90; p=0.26).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: