Long-term outcomes of second-generation drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass graft: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials and multivariable adjusted data.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
André Luiz Carvalho Ferreira, Maria Esther Benitez Gonzalez, Ana Emanuel Coelho Pessoa Lima, Almir Alamino Lacalle, Gabriel Saad, Camila Mota Guida
{"title":"Long-term outcomes of second-generation drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass graft: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials and multivariable adjusted data.","authors":"André Luiz Carvalho Ferreira, Maria Esther Benitez Gonzalez, Ana Emanuel Coelho Pessoa Lima, Almir Alamino Lacalle, Gabriel Saad, Camila Mota Guida","doi":"10.1097/MCA.0000000000001503","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Long-term data are limited comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with second-generation drug-eluting stents (S-DES) vs coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with complex coronary artery disease (CAD). We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing these interventions in patients with left main or multivessel CAD. We systematically reviewed PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for studies that compared PCI with S-DES and CABG in patients with left main or multivessel CAD with a minimum mean follow-up period of 3 years. Outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We extracted data from observational studies as multivariable-adjusted or propensity score-matched hazard ratio to minimize confounding and pooled hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random effects model in Review Manager 5.4.1. We included 10 studies, 3 of which were randomized controlled trials, comprising a total of 26964 patients, of whom 14928 underwent PCI. As compared with CABG, S-DES had a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.35; 95% CI 1.22-1.49; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%), MACE (hazard ratio 1.27; 95% CI 1.08-1.50; P = 0.005; I2 = 67%), and MI (hazard ratio 2.43; 95% CI 1.80-3.28; P < 0.01; I2 = 0%). There was no significant difference between groups in incidence of stroke. In this meta-analysis of patients with complex CAD, PCI with S-DES was associated with an increased risk of mortality, MI, and MACE compared with CABG.</p>","PeriodicalId":10702,"journal":{"name":"Coronary artery disease","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Coronary artery disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCA.0000000000001503","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Long-term data are limited comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with second-generation drug-eluting stents (S-DES) vs coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with complex coronary artery disease (CAD). We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing these interventions in patients with left main or multivessel CAD. We systematically reviewed PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for studies that compared PCI with S-DES and CABG in patients with left main or multivessel CAD with a minimum mean follow-up period of 3 years. Outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We extracted data from observational studies as multivariable-adjusted or propensity score-matched hazard ratio to minimize confounding and pooled hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random effects model in Review Manager 5.4.1. We included 10 studies, 3 of which were randomized controlled trials, comprising a total of 26964 patients, of whom 14928 underwent PCI. As compared with CABG, S-DES had a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 1.35; 95% CI 1.22-1.49; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%), MACE (hazard ratio 1.27; 95% CI 1.08-1.50; P = 0.005; I2 = 67%), and MI (hazard ratio 2.43; 95% CI 1.80-3.28; P < 0.01; I2 = 0%). There was no significant difference between groups in incidence of stroke. In this meta-analysis of patients with complex CAD, PCI with S-DES was associated with an increased risk of mortality, MI, and MACE compared with CABG.

第二代药物洗脱支架与冠状动脉旁路移植术的长期结果:随机试验和多变量调整数据的系统回顾和荟萃分析
在复杂冠状动脉疾病(CAD)患者中,经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)联合第二代药物洗脱支架(S-DES)与冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的长期数据比较有限。我们的目的是进行系统回顾和荟萃分析,比较这些干预措施对左主干或多血管CAD患者的影响。我们系统地回顾了PubMed、Embase和Cochrane关于左主干或多血管CAD患者PCI、S-DES和CABG的研究,平均随访时间至少为3年。研究结果包括全因死亡率、心肌梗死(MI)、中风和主要不良心血管事件(MACE)。我们使用Review Manager 5.4.1中的随机效应模型从观察性研究中提取数据,采用多变量调整或倾向评分匹配的风险比来最大限度地减少混淆,并将风险比与95%置信区间(ci)合并。我们纳入了10项研究,其中3项为随机对照试验,共纳入26964例患者,其中14928例接受了PCI治疗。与CABG相比,S-DES的全因死亡率明显高于CABG(风险比1.35;95% ci 1.22-1.49;P < 0.001;I2 = 0%), MACE(风险比1.27;95% ci 1.08-1.50;P = 0.005;I2 = 67%)和MI(风险比2.43;95% ci 1.80-3.28;P < 0.01;I2 = 0%)。两组间卒中发生率无显著差异。在这项复杂CAD患者的荟萃分析中,与CABG相比,PCI合并S-DES与死亡率、心肌梗死和MACE风险增加相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Coronary artery disease
Coronary artery disease 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
190
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Coronary Artery Disease welcomes reports of original research with a clinical emphasis, including observational studies, clinical trials, translational research, novel imaging, pharmacology and interventional approaches as well as advances in laboratory research that contribute to the understanding of coronary artery disease. Each issue of Coronary Artery Disease is divided into four areas of focus: Original Research articles, Review in Depth articles by leading experts in the field, Editorials and Images in Coronary Artery Disease. The Editorials will comment on selected original research published in each issue of Coronary Artery Disease, as well as highlight controversies in coronary artery disease understanding and management. Submitted artcles undergo a preliminary review by the editor. Some articles may be returned to authors without further consideration. Those being considered for publication will undergo further assessment and​ peer-review by the editors and those invited to do so from a reviewer pool.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信