Background: Currently, DES is a reasonable treatment option for LMCA disease but CABG continues to be first-line treatment. Multiple randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have compared outcomes between these two treatment modalities. Recently, these trials published their long-term results with conflicting findings.
Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs that compared DES vs CABG in patients with LMCA disease. We only included trials with follow up duration of at least 5 years. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included risk of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and repeat revascularization.
Results: We included a total of 4 RCTs. The median-weighted follow up period was 6.5 years. There was no significant difference between DES and CABG in all-cause mortality (Risk ratio (RR) 1.10; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 1.31; p = 0.28), risk of cardiac death (RR of 1.08, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.38; p = 0.56), total MI (RR of 1.22, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.56; p = 0.11), and stroke (RR of 0.85, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.57; p = 0.60). The risk of repeat revascularization (RR of 1.75, 95% CI 1.50 to 2.03; p < 0.00001), and non-periprocedural MI (RR of 2.13, 95% CI 1.53 to 2.97; p < 0.00001) were significantly higher in the DES arm.
Conclusions: DES has similar long-term outcomes compared to CABG in terms of all-cause mortality, cardiac death, total MI and stroke; but was associated with a higher risk of repeat revascularization, and non-periprocedural MI.
Keywords: Coronary artery disease; Percutaneous coronary intervention.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.