Annals
Established in 1927 by the American College of Physicians
:
Advanced search
Originally published on October 15, 2007.
box Article
 arrow  Table of Contents                
space
 arrow  Full Text of this article Free
space
 arrow  PDF of this article
space
All Versions of this Article:
  arrow 147/10/703 (most recent)
  arrow 0000605-200711200-00185v1
 arrow  Figures/Tables List
space
 arrow  Audio Summary
space
 arrow  Related articles in Annals
space
 arrow  CME course
space
box Services
 arrow 
pier article
Related Clinical
Content
space
 arrow  Send comment/rapid response letter
space
 arrow  Published comments/rapid response letters
space
 arrow  Notify a friend about this article
space
 arrow  Alert me when this article is cited
space
 arrow  Add to Personal Archive
space
 arrow  Download to Citation Manager
space
 arrow  ACP Search
space
 arrow  Get Permissions
space
box Google Scholar
 arrow  Search for Related Content
space
box Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike Add to Complore Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Facebook Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter
What's this?
box PubMed
Articles in PubMed by Author:
 arrow  Bravata, D. M.
space
 arrow  Hlatky, M. A.
space
 arrow  Related Articles in PubMed
space
 arrow  PubMed Citation
space
 arrow  PubMed
space

REVIEW

Systematic Review: The Comparative Effectiveness of Percutaneous Coronary Interventions and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery

right arrow Dena M. Bravata, MD, MS; Allison L. Gienger, BA; Kathryn M. McDonald, MM; Vandana Sundaram, MPH; Marco V. Perez, MD; Robin Varghese, MD, MS; John R. Kapoor, MD, PhD; Reza Ardehali, MD, PhD; Douglas K. Owens, MD, MS; and Mark A. Hlatky, MD

20 November 2007 | Volume 147 Issue 10 | Pages 703-716

Background: The comparative effectiveness of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients in whom both procedures are feasible remains poorly understood.

Purpose: To compare the effectiveness of PCI and CABG in patients for whom coronary revascularization is clinically indicated.

Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases (1966–2006); conference proceedings; and bibliographies of retrieved articles.

Study Selection: Randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) reported in any language that compared clinical outcomes of PCI with those of CABG, and selected observational studies.

Data Extraction: Information was extracted on study design, sample characteristics, interventions, and clinical outcomes.

Data Synthesis: The authors identified 23 RCTs in which 5019 patients were randomly assigned to PCI and 4944 patients were randomly assigned to CABG. The difference in survival after PCI or CABG was less than 1% over 10 years of follow-up. Survival did not differ between PCI and CABG for patients with diabetes in the 6 trials that reported on this subgroup. Procedure-related strokes were more common after CABG than after PCI (1.2% vs. 0.6%; risk difference, 0.6%; P = 0.002). Angina relief was greater after CABG than after PCI, with risk differences ranging from 5% to 8% at 1 to 5 years (P < 0.001). The absolute rates of angina relief at 5 years were 79% after PCI and 84% after CABG. Repeated revascularization was more common after PCI than after CABG (risk difference, 24% at 1 year and 33% at 5 years; P < 0.001); the absolute rates at 5 years were 46.1% after balloon angioplasty, 40.1% after PCI with stents, and 9.8% after CABG. In the observational studies, the CABG–PCI hazard ratio for death favored PCI among patients with the least severe disease and CABG among those with the most severe disease.

Limitations: The RCTs were conducted in leading centers in selected patients. The authors could not assess whether comparative outcomes vary according to clinical factors, such as extent of coronary disease, ejection fraction, or previous procedures. Only 1 small trial used drug-eluting stents.

Conclusion: Compared with PCI, CABG was more effective in relieving angina and led to fewer repeated revascularizations but had a higher risk for procedural stroke. Survival to 10 years was similar for both procedures.


Editors' Notes
space

Context

  • The relative benefits and harms of coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are sometimes unclear.

Contribution

  • This systematic review of 23 randomized trials found that survival at 10 years was similar for CABG and PCI, even among diabetic patients. Procedural strokes and angina relief were more common after CABG (risk difference, 0.6% and about 5% to 8%, respectively), whereas repeated revascularization procedures were more common after PCI (risk difference, 24% at 1 year).

Caution

  • Only 1 small trial used drug-eluting stents. Few patients with extensive coronary disease or poor ventricular function were enrolled.

—The Editors

 

Author and Article Information
space

From the Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research and Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, and Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California.

Acknowledgment: The authors thank Ingram Olkin for guidance with statistical analyses, Artyom Sedrakyan for advice throughout the project, Olga Saynina for digitizing the survival curves, and Christopher D. Stave for assisting with the literature searches.

Grant Support: This report is based on research conducted by the Stanford-UCSF Evidence-based Practice Center under contract no. 290-02-0017 from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

Potential Financial Conflicts of Interest: Grants received: D.M. Bravata (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality). Other: M.A. Hlatky (investigator for the BARI and AWESOME trials).

Requests for Single Reprints: Dena M. Bravata, MD, MS, Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research, 117 Encina Commons, Stanford, CA 94305-6019; e-mail, dbravata{at}stanford.edu.

Current Author Addresses: Drs. Bravata and Owens, Ms. Gienger, Ms. McDonald, and Ms. Sundaram: Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research, 117 Encina Commons, Stanford, CA 94305-6019.

Drs. Perez, Kapoor, and Ardehali: Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Falk Cardiovascular Research Center Building, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA 94305.

Dr. Varghese: Division of Cardiac Surgery, Schulich School of Medicine, University of Western Ontario, Room B6-102, LHSC UH, 339 Windermere Road, London, Ontario N6A 5A5, Canada.

Dr. Hlatky: Department of Health Research and Policy, Stanford University School of Medicine, Redwood Building, T150A, Stanford, CA 94305-5405.

Author Contributions: Conception and design: D.M. Bravata, K.M. McDonald, V. Sundaram, M.V. Perez, R. Varghese, J.R. Kapoor, D.K. Owens, M.A. Hlatky.

Analysis and interpretation of the data: D.M. Bravata, M.V. Perez, J.R. Kapoor, R. Ardehali, D.K. Owens, M.A. Hlatky.

Drafting of the article: D.M. Bravata, J.R. Kapoor, D.K. Owens, M.A. Hlatky.

Critical revision of the article for important intellectual content: D.M. Bravata, A.L. Gienger, K.M. McDonald, V. Sundaram, M.V. Perez, R. Varghese, J.R. Kapoor, R. Ardehali, D.K. Owens, M.A. Hlatky.

Final approval of the article: D.M. Bravata, A.L. Gienger, K.M. McDonald, V. Sundaram, R. Varghese, D.K. Owens, M.A. Hlatky.

Provision of study materials or patients: D.M. Bravata, A.L. Gienger, M.A. Hlatky.

Statistical expertise: D.M. Bravata, D.K. Owens, M.A. Hlatky.

Obtaining of funding: D.M. Bravata, K.M. McDonald, D.K. Owens, M.A. Hlatky.

Administrative, technical, or logistic support: D.M. Bravata, A.L. Gienger, V. Sundaram, M.A. Hlatky.

Collection and assembly of data: D.M. Bravata, A.L. Gienger, V. Sundaram, M.V. Perez, R. Varghese, J.R. Kapoor, R. Ardehali, M.A. Hlatky.

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?

Related articles in Annals:

Editorials
Coronary Revascularization: New Evidence, New Challenges
Raymond J. Gibbons AND Stephan D. Fihn
Annals 2007 147: 732-734. [Full Text]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Am Coll CardiolHome page
J. Mehilli, A. Kastrati, R. A. Byrne, O. Bruskina, R. Iijima, S. Schulz, J. Pache, M. Seyfarth, S. Massberg, K.-L. Laugwitz, et al.
Paclitaxel- Versus Sirolimus-Eluting Stents for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., May 12, 2009; 53(19): 1760 - 1768.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
P. W. Serruys, M.-C. Morice, A. P. Kappetein, A. Colombo, D. R. Holmes, M. J. Mack, E. Stahle, T. E. Feldman, M. van den Brand, E. J. Bass, et al.
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting for Severe Coronary Artery Disease
N. Engl. J. Med., March 5, 2009; 360(10): 961 - 972.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
R. A. Lange and L. D. Hillis
Coronary Revascularization in Context
N. Engl. J. Med., March 5, 2009; 360(10): 1024 - 1026.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CirculationHome page
C. R. Smith
Surgery, Not Percutaneous Revascularization, Is the Preferred Strategy for Patients With Significant Left Main Coronary Stenosis
Circulation, February 24, 2009; 119(7): 1013 - 1020.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CirculationHome page
P. S. Teirstein
Percutaneous Revascularization Is the Preferred Strategy for Patients With Significant Left Main Coronary Stenosis
Circulation, February 24, 2009; 119(7): 1021 - 1033.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann. Thorac. Surg.Home page
A. L. W. Shroyer and G. K. Grunwald
Invited commentary.
Ann. Thorac. Surg., February 1, 2009; 87(2): 473 - 474.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Am Coll Cardiol IntvHome page
J. G. Byrne, M. Leacche, D. E. Vaughan, and D. X. Zhao
Hybrid Cardiovascular Procedures
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv., October 1, 2008; 1(5): 459 - 468.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Am Coll Cardiol IntvHome page
J. R. Kapoor, A. L. Gienger, R. Ardehali, R. Varghese, M. V. Perez, V. Sundaram, K. M. McDonald, D. K. Owens, M. A. Hlatky, and D. M. Bravata
Isolated Disease of the Proximal Left Anterior Descending Artery: Comparing the Effectiveness of Percutaneous Coronary Interventions and Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv., October 1, 2008; 1(5): 483 - 491.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CirculationHome page
J. Daemen, E. Boersma, M. Flather, J. Booth, R. Stables, A. Rodriguez, G. Rodriguez-Granillo, W. A. Hueb, P. A. Lemos, and P. W. Serruys
Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Stenting and Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis With 5-Year Patient-Level Data From the ARTS, ERACI-II, MASS-II, and SoS Trials
Circulation, September 9, 2008; 118(11): 1146 - 1154.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Circ Cardiovasc Qual OutcomesHome page
A. J. Kirtane and D. J. Cohen
When Is Better Not Good Enough?: Insights From the COURAGE Economic Study
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes, September 1, 2008; 1(1): 4 - 6.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Am Coll CardiolHome page
E. Meliga, M. Valgimigli, P. Buszman, and P. W. Serruys
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention or Coronary Artery Bypass Graft for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: The Endless Debate
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., August 12, 2008; 52(7): 582 - 584.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Am Coll CardiolHome page
S. Kaul, W. E. Boden, T. B. Ferguson Jr, R. A. Guyton, M. J. Mack, P. T. Sergeant, R. J. Shemin, P. K. Smith, S. Yusuf, and D. P. Taggart
Reply
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., August 12, 2008; 52(7): 584 - 586.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Circ Cardiovasc InterventHome page
D. R. Holmes Jr and D. O. Williams
Catheter-Based Treatment of Coronary Artery Disease: Past, Present, and Future
Circ Cardiovasc Intervent, August 1, 2008; 1(1): 60 - 73.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CirculationHome page
M. A. Hlatky and D. M. Bravata
Stents or Surgery?: New Data on the Comparative Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery
Circulation, July 22, 2008; 118(4): 325 - 327.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
CirculationHome page
J. Booth, T. Clayton, J. Pepper, F. Nugara, M. Flather, U. Sigwart, R. H. Stables, and on Behalf of the SoS Investigators
Randomized, Controlled Trial of Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Six-Year Follow-Up From the Stent or Surgery Trial (SoS)
Circulation, July 22, 2008; 118(4): 381 - 388.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
J. Daemen, N. Kukreja, P. W. Serruys, A. Abbate, M. J. Lipinski, K. J. Harjai, A. C.C. Ng, L. Kritharides, J. H. Burack, and E. L. Hannan
Drug-Eluting Stents vs. Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting
N. Engl. J. Med., June 12, 2008; 358(24): 2641 - 2644.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ANN INTERN MEDHome page
H. Liu, D. M. Bravata, I. Olkin, A. Friedlander, V. Liu, B. Roberts, E. Bendavid, O. Saynina, S. R. Salpeter, A. M. Garber, et al.
Systematic Review: The Effects of Growth Hormone on Athletic Performance
Ann Intern Med, May 20, 2008; 148(10): 747 - 758.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
J. P. Carrozza Jr.
Drug-Eluting Stents -- Pushing the Envelope beyond the Labels?
N. Engl. J. Med., January 24, 2008; 358(4): 405 - 407.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
ANN INTERN MEDHome page
R. J. Gibbons and S. D. Fihn
Coronary Revascularization: New Evidence, New Challenges
Ann Intern Med, November 20, 2007; 147(10): 732 - 734.
[Full Text] [PDF]

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Question of Data Exclusion
Daniel W Carlson
Annals Online, 28 Jan 2008 [Full text]



 Home | Current Issue | Past Issues | In the Clinic | ACP Journal Club | CME | Collections | Audio/Video | Mobile | Subscribe | Tools | Help | ACP Online 

Copyright © 2007 by the American College of Physicians.