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

  1. Dena M. Bravata, MD, MS;
  2. Allison L. Gienger, BA;
  3. Kathryn M. McDonald, MM;
  4. Vandana Sundaram, MPH;
  5. Marco V. Perez, MD;
  6. Robin Varghese, MD, MS;
  7. John R. Kapoor, MD, PhD;
  8. Reza Ardehali, MD, PhD;
  9. Douglas K. Owens, MD, MS; and
  10. Mark A. Hlatky, MD
  1. 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.
     
    Next Section

    Abstract

    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

    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

    Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and catheter-based percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), with or without coronary stents, are alternative approaches to mechanical coronary revascularization. These 2 coronary revascularization techniques are among the most common major medical procedures performed in North America and Europe: In 2005, 261 000 CABG procedures and 645 000 PCI procedures were performed in the United States alone (1). However, the comparative effectiveness of CABG and PCI remains poorly understood for patients in whom both procedures are technically feasible and coronary revascularization is clinically indicated.

    In patients with left main or triple-vessel coronary artery disease with reduced left ventricular function, CABG is generally preferred because randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that it improves survival compared with medical therapy (2, 3). In patients with most forms of single-vessel disease, PCI is generally the preferred form of coronary revascularization (4), in light of its lower clinical risk and the evidence that PCI reduces angina and myocardial ischemia in this subset of patients (5). Most RCTs comparing CABG and PCI have been conducted in populations with coronary artery disease between these extremes, namely patients with single-vessel, proximal left anterior descending disease; most forms of double-vessel disease; or less extensive forms of triple-vessel disease.

    We sought to evaluate the evidence from RCTs on the comparative effectiveness of PCI and CABG. We included trials using balloon angioplasty or coronary stents because quantitative reviews have shown no differences in mortality or myocardial infarction between these PCI techniques (6, 7). We also included trials using standard or minimally invasive CABG or both procedures (8, 9). We sought to document differences between PCI and CABG in survival, cardiovascular complications (such as stroke and myocardial infarction), and freedom from angina. Finally, we reviewed selected observational studies to assess the generalizability of the RCTs.

    Previous SectionNext Section

    Methods

    Data Sources

    We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for studies published between January 1966 and August 2006 by using such terms as angioplasty, coronary, and coronary artery bypass surgery, as reported in detail elsewhere (10). We also sought additional studies by reviewing the reference lists of included articles, conference abstracts, and the bibliographies of expert advisors. We did not limit the searches to the English language.

    Study Selection

    We sought RCTs that compared health outcomes of PCI and CABG. We excluded trials that compared PCI alone or CABG alone with medical therapy, those that compared 2 forms of PCI, and those that compared 2 forms of CABG. The outcomes of interest were survival, myocardial infarction, stroke, angina, and use of additional revascularization procedures. Two investigators independently reviewed titles, abstracts, and the full text as needed to determine whether studies met inclusion criteria. Conflicts between reviewers were resolved through re-review and discussion. We did not include results published solely in abstract form.

    Data Extraction and Quality Assessment

    Two authors independently abstracted data on study design; setting; population characteristics (sex, age, race/ethnicity, comorbid conditions, and coronary anatomy); eligibility and exclusion criteria; procedures performed; numbers of patients screened, eligible, enrolled, and lost to follow-up; method of outcome assessment; and results for each outcome. We assessed the quality of included trials by using predefined criteria and graded their quality as A, B, or C by using methods described in detail elsewhere (10). In brief, a grade of A indicates a high-quality trial that clearly described the population, setting, interventions, and comparison groups; randomly allocated patients to alternative treatments; had low dropout rates; and reported intention-to-treat analysis of outcomes. A grade of B indicates a randomized trial with incomplete information about methods that might mask important limitations. A grade of C indicates that the trial had evident flaws, such as improper randomization, that could introduce significant bias.

    Data Synthesis and Analysis

    We used random-effects models to compute weighted mean rates and SEs for each outcome. We computed summary risk differences and odds ratios between PCI and CABG and the 95% CI for each outcome of interest at annual intervals. Because the results did not differ materially when risk differences and odds ratios (10) were used and the low rate of several outcomes (for example, procedural mortality) made the risk difference a more stable outcome metric (11, 12), we report here only the risk differences.

    We assessed heterogeneity of effects by using chi-square and I2 statistics (13). When effects were heterogeneous (I2 > 50%), we explored the effects of individual studies on summary effects by removing each study individually. We assessed the possibility of publication bias by visual inspection of funnel plots and calculated the number of missing studies required to change a statistically significant summary effect to not statistically significant (11). We performed analyses by using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software, version 2.0 (Biostat, Englewood, New Jersey).

    Inclusion of Observational Studies

    We also searched for observational data to evaluate the generalizability of the RCT results, as reported in detail elsewhere (10). In brief, we included observational studies from clinical or administrative databases that included at least 1000 recipients of each revascularization procedure and provided sufficient information about the patient populations (such as demographic characteristics, preprocedure coronary anatomy, and comorbid conditions) and procedures performed (such as balloon angioplasty vs. bare-metal stents vs. drug-eluting stents).

    Role of the Funding Source

    This project was supported by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Representatives of the funding agency reviewed and commented on the study protocol and drafts of the manuscript, but the authors had final responsibility for the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of the study.

    Previous SectionNext Section

    Results

    We identified 1695 potentially relevant articles, of which 204 merited full-text review (Appendix Figure). A total of 113 articles reporting on 23 unique RCTs met inclusion criteria (Table 1[14–126]). These trials enrolled a total of 9963 patients, of whom 5019 were randomly assigned to PCI and 4944 to CABG. Most trials were conducted in Europe, the United Kingdom, or both locations; only 3 trials were performed in the United States. The early studies (patient entry from 1987 to 1993) used balloon angioplasty as the PCI technique, and the later studies (patient entry from 1994 to 2002) used stents as the PCI technique. Only 1 small trial of PCI versus CABG used drug-eluting stents (116). Nine trials limited entry to patients with single-vessel disease of the proximal left anterior descending artery, whereas the remaining 14 trials enrolled patients with multivessel disease, either predominantly (3 trials) or exclusively (11 trials).

    Appendix Figure.
    View larger version:
    Appendix Figure. Study flow diagram.

    CABG = coronary artery bypass grafting; CAD = coronary artery disease; PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention; RCT = randomized, controlled trial.

    View this table:
    Table 1. Overview of Randomized, Controlled Trials

    The quality of 21 trials was graded as A, and 1 trial (117) was graded as B. One trial (116) was graded as C because randomization may not have been properly executed (details are available elsewhere [10]). We performed sensitivity analyses by removing these studies from the analysis, and our summary results did not change statistically significantly.

    The average age of the trial participants was 61 years, 27% were women, and most were of European ancestry. Roughly 20% had diabetes, half had hypertension, and half had hyperlipidemia. Whereas approximately 40% of patients had a previous myocardial infarction, few had heart failure or poor left ventricular function. Among studies that enrolled patients with multivessel coronary disease, most had double-vessel rather than triple-vessel disease.

    Revascularization procedures were performed by using standard methods for the time the trial was conducted (Table 1). Among patients with multivessel disease, more grafts were placed during CABG than vessels were dilated during PCI. Among patients assigned to PCI, stents were commonly used in the recent studies, but in the earlier trials, balloon angioplasty was standard. Among patients assigned to CABG, arterial grafting with the left internal mammary artery was frequently done, especially in more recent trials. Some studies used minimally invasive, direct coronary artery bypass and off-pump operations to perform CABG in patients with single-vessel left anterior descending disease (Table 1).

    Short-Term and Procedural Outcomes

    Survival (within 30 days of the procedure) was high for both procedures: 98.9% for PCI and 98.2% for CABG. When data from all trials were combined, the survival difference between PCI and CABG was small and not statistically significant (0.2% [95% CI, −0.3% to 0.6%]) (Figure 1). These results were unchanged after exclusion of AWESOME (Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation) (28) and the Myoprotect I (104) trial, which enrolled patients who were more acutely ill.

    Figure 1.
    View larger version:
    Figure 1. Procedural survival (top) and stroke risk (bottom).

    The size of each box is proportional to the sample size of the trial. Bars represent 95% CIs. The I2 statistic was <1 for both procedural survival and procedural stroke risk. AMIST = Angioplasty versus Minimally Invasive Surgery Trial; ARTS = Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study; AWESOME = Angina with Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation; BARI = Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation; CABG = coronary artery bypass grafting; CABRI = Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularization Investigation; EAST = Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial; ERACI = Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease; GABI = German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation; MASS = Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study; PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention; RITA = Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina; SIMA = Stenting versus Internal Mammary Artery Study; SoS = Stent or Surgery. *Survival data were abstracted from Kaplan–Meier curves.

    The rate of procedural stroke (reported in 15 randomized trials) was higher after CABG (1.2%) than after PCI (0.6%) (Figure 1). The difference between PCI and CABG in procedural stroke was 0.6% (CI, 0.2% to 1%) (P = 0.002). Procedural myocardial infarction was not assessed in a consistent manner across trials of PCI and CABG. The pooled PCI–CABG difference in freedom from procedural myocardial infarction was small and not statistically significant (0.1% [CI, −1.0% to 1.2%]).

    Long-Term Outcomes

    Survival

    Follow-up in the RCTs ranged from 6 months to 13 years. Overall survival across all randomized trials was similar between CABG and PCI at 1 year (96.4% vs. 96.5%) and 5 years (90.7% vs. 89.7%) of follow-up. The absolute survival difference between PCI and CABG at each time point was less than 1%. The 4 trials that reported longer follow-up (62, 80, 88, 110) showed no consistent change in the PCI–CABG survival difference after 5 years. We found no evidence of probable publication bias.

    The comparative survival benefit did not differ significantly when randomized trials were subdivided into those enrolling patients with single-vessel proximal left anterior descending disease and those enrolling patients with multivessel disease (Figure 2). Among trials of multivessel disease, PCI and CABG results did not differ substantially for trials using balloon angioplasty versus trials using stents (Figure 3).

    Figure 2.
    View larger version:
    Figure 2. Five-year survival in patients with single-vessel disease (SVD) versus multivessel disease (MVD).

    The size of each box is proportional to the sample size of the trial. Bars represent 95% CIs. The I2 statistic for 5-year survival was 13 among SVD trials and 14 among MVD trials. ARTS = Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study; AWESOME = Angina with Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation; BARI = Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation; CABG = coronary artery bypass grafting; EAST = Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial; ERACI = Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease; GABI = German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation; MASS = Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study; PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention; RITA = Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina. *Data were abstracted from Kaplan–Meier curves.

    Figure 3.
    View larger version:
    Figure 3. Five-year survival with balloon angioplasty or stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with multivessel disease (MVD).

    The size of each box is proportional to the sample size of the trial. Bars represent 95% CIs. The I2 statistic for 5-year survival was 10 among MVD trials using balloon angioplasty and <1.0 among trials using stents. ARTS = Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study; AWESOME = Angina with Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation; BARI = Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation; BMS = bare-metal stent; CABG = coronary artery bypass grafting; EAST = Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial; ERACI = Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease; GABI = German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation; MASS = Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study; PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention; RITA = Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina. *Survival data were abstracted from Kaplan–Meier curves.

    Other Long-Term Outcomes

    Angina relief was more common after CABG than after PCI at 1, 3, and 5 years after the procedure. At 1 year, the proportion of patients without angina was 75% in PCI-assigned patients and 84% in CABG-assigned patients; at 5 years, this value increased to 79% in PCI-assigned patients but remained 84% percent in CABG-assigned patients. The PCI–CABG risk difference ranged from 5% to 8% between 1 and 5 years after the procedure (P < 0.001).

    A greater proportion of patients who had CABG was without repeated coronary revascularization (96.2% at 1 year and 90.2% at 5 years) compared with patients who had PCI (73.5% at 1 year and 53.9% at 5 years for balloon angioplasty trials and 59.9% at 5 years for stent trials). Patients who received PCI required 24% more repeated procedures than CABG recipients at 1 year (P < 0.001) and 33% more repeated procedures at 5 years (P < 0.001). Although the trials consistently favored CABG, the results were statistically heterogeneous (I2 = 93 at 1 year, and I2 = 78 at 5 years). This difference between PCI and CABG was greater in trials that used balloon angioplasty (−37% [CI, −42% to −31%]) than in trials that used coronary stents (−27% [CI, −39% to −16%]), although patients undergoing PCI with stents still required more repeated procedures than did patients undergoing CABG.

    Ten studies reported myocardial infarction rates in long-term follow-up, which increased among all patients between 1 and 5 years, but at a somewhat higher rate for PCI recipients. At 5 years, the mean (±SE) rate of myocardial infarction was 11.9% ± 3.0% for PCI recipients and 10.9% ± 2.6% for CABG recipients. The summary differences in myocardial infarction between PCI and CABG were less than 1%.

    Comparative Effectiveness

    Most trials did not report outcomes in subgroups, and even fewer performed formal statistical interaction tests to gauge whether outcomes varied in a statistically significant manner by clinical characteristics. Outcomes were reported by 5 or more trials only for the subgroups defined by diabetes, age, sex, smoking, and number of diseased vessels. Evidence was insufficient to evaluate whether hypertension, race, obesity, renal dysfunction, peripheral vascular disease, previous coronary revascularization procedures, clinical presentation, or left ventricular function affected the comparative outcomes of PCI and CABG, because each of these characteristics was reported in only 1 to 3 trials (10).

    Outcomes by age were examined by BARI (Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Intervention) (57), AWESOME (31), and a pooled analysis of 4 stent trials (ARTS [Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study], ERACI II [second Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease], MASS II [Second Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study], and SoS [Stent or Surgery]) (127). Overall, older patients had more procedural complications, especially stroke. Long-term survival after PCI or CABG did not differ significantly among patients older than 65 years of age compared with younger patients, but very few patients older than 75 years of age were enrolled.

    Six trials reported on comparative survival among patients with diabetes (Figure 4). Whereas BARI reported a survival advantage for CABG among patients with diabetes (37, 64), the other 5 trials did not. At 5 years, the mean (±SE) summary survival rate was 79.2% ± 5.8% for PCI recipients and 82.2% ± 5.6% for CABG recipients. When we combined all trials, survival in patients with diabetes at 5 years was higher for CABG by only 0.2%, but the confidence bounds of this estimate were wide (−8.8% to 8.3%).

    Figure 4.
    View larger version:
    Figure 4. Five-year survival in patients with diabetes.

    The size of each box is proportional to the sample size of the trial. Bars represent 95% CIs. The I2 statistic was 40. All studies that reported comparative effectiveness data for patients with diabetes were included in this analysis, not just studies that reported comparative outcomes for patients with and without diabetes. Hazard ratios from the German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation for death after PCI or CABG were reported to not differ between patients with or without diabetes; however, these data were not shown. AWESOME = Angina with Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation; BARI = Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation; CABG = coronary artery bypass grafting; EAST = Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial; ERACI = Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease; MASS = Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study; PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention; RITA = Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina.

    Outcomes in patients with double-vessel disease were compared with those in patients with triple-vessel disease in BARI (40), EAST (Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial) (80), ERACI II (86), and the pooled analysis of the stent trials (127). In each instance, the survival advantage of CABG was greater for triple-vessel disease than for double-vessel disease, but the difference between CABG and PCI was not statistically significant in any trial.

    No sex-based difference in survival (55) or cardiovascular events (127) was observed between PCI and CABG. Similarly, cigarette smoking was not associated with a difference in outcomes between the interventions (38, 62, 127).

    Mortality Rates in Clinical Registries

    Five major clinical registries (128–132) included more than 1000 patients who received PCI and 1000 patients who received CABG, reported long-term survival patterns, and used multivariable statistical methods to adjust for clinical differences in patients selected for PCI and CABG (Table 2). These registries reported striking differences in the patients selected for these 2 procedures: Most patients with single-vessel disease received PCI, and most patients with triple-vessel disease received CABG. Across the spectrum of disease severity, the CABG–PCI hazard ratio for mortality ranged from 0.48 to 0.86 favoring CABG (128, 129). The CABG–PCI hazard ratio was affected by the extent of coronary disease. In the Duke University Medical Center registry (130), the CABG–PCI hazard ratio varied from 2.1 among patients with the least severe disease to 0.45 in patients with the most severe disease. Similar variations in the hazard ratio according to severity of disease were reported by various investigators using the Alberta, Canada (131); northern New England (129); and New York State (132) registries. In the patients with intermediate extent of disease who were most similar to patients enrolled in randomized trials, the studies based on data from clinical registries reported CABG–PCI hazard ratios close to 1.0.

    View this table:
    Table 2. Long-Term Survival in Major Clinical Registries
    Previous SectionNext Section

    Discussion

    Our review of 23 randomized trials found that long-term survival did not statistically significantly differ between PCI and CABG among patients in whom coronary revascularization is clinically indicated and in whom both procedures are technically feasible. Despite this similarity in long-term survival, several distinct differences between these alternative coronary revascularization procedures may affect the choice of procedure. The short-term risk for stroke was higher with CABG than with PCI, yet the frequency of angina was lower after CABG than after PCI over 5 years. Patients who received CABG also underwent fewer repeated revascularization procedures than did patients who received PCI, even when coronary stents were used.

    Coronary revascularization methods continue to be refined, so that evaluation of the outcomes of PCI and CABG remains a moving target. Percutaneous coronary intervention has evolved from its initial reliance on balloon angioplasty techniques to use of bare-metal stents and, more recently, drug-eluting stents. Although these refinements in PCI technique have progressively reduced restenosis and the need for repeated coronary revascularization procedures, they have not reduced the rate of mortality or myocardial infarction after PCI (6, 7). Consequently, the earlier trials of PCI versus CABG continue to provide pertinent evidence about the “hard outcomes” of greatest importance after coronary revascularization. Techniques and outcomes of CABG have also improved over time (134, 135), and several large ongoing randomized trials are comparing contemporary PCI with contemporary CABG (for example, FREEDOM [Future Revascularization Evaluation in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus; ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT00086450], SYNTAX [SYNergy Between PCI With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery; ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT00114972], and VA CARDS [Coronary Artery Revascularization in Diabetes; ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT00326196]).

    Randomized trials enroll patients who meet strict inclusion and exclusion criteria and are conducted in centers chosen to have excellent clinical results and high procedure volumes. The perennial question about all randomized trials is whether their results can be generalized to less selected patient populations and practice settings. The randomized trials of PCI and CABG enrolled few patients who were older than 75 years of age; had poor left ventricular function, heart failure, or ongoing clinical instability; or had undergone previous CABG or PCI procedures. The results of the randomized trials, and our synthesis of those results, do not necessarily apply to these and other populations that were not well represented.

    The greatest difference between patients enrolled in the clinical trials and those in typical practice was the requirement that both PCI and CABG be technically feasible and provide adequate revascularization in all randomly assigned patients. In large clinical registries, patients selected for PCI differ in important ways from patients chosen for CABG: Most patients treated with PCI have single-vessel coronary disease, whereas most patients treated with CABG have triple-vessel or left main coronary disease, and many have reduced left ventricular function (136, 137). The patients enrolled in clinical trials generally had an extent of coronary disease that fell between these 2 extremes, and the results of randomized trials may not apply to patients with less extensive or more extensive coronary disease.

    Our finding of similar long-term survival after randomization to PCI or CABG differs from the findings of studies based on several large clinical registries, which have reported improved survival after CABG (Table 2). These large clinical registry studies were observational, nonrandomized comparisons, however, and are inherently less reliable than randomized trials because strong selection biases may be present that even sophisticated statistical adjustment techniques cannot remove. Clinical registry studies have shown that the extent and severity of coronary disease, which are the major factors determining selection for PCI versus CABG, strongly affect relative survival after PCI or CABG (129–131). In an analysis of information from the Duke University Medical Center database, survival after PCI and CABG was equivalent among patients who had an intermediate extent of coronary disease, similar to that of patients eligible for randomization in trials of PCI versus CABG (130). These observations suggest that the seemingly disparate results of randomized trials and clinical registries can be reconciled by taking into account that the overall outcomes in clinical registries are heavily weighted by the larger number of events in the higher-risk patients with the most extensive disease—who seem to have better outcomes after CABG than after PCI—whereas overall outcomes in the randomized trials were assessed in intermediate-risk patients—in whom CABG and PCI outcomes were also similar in clinical registries (130).

    The potential for variation in the comparative effectiveness of treatments according to patient characteristics is very important to clinical decision making. Large clinical trials now commonly report relative risk reductions in several subgroups of interest, as well as in the overall population, but statistically significant variations in subgroup outcomes are distinctly unusual. Significant variations in treatment effect are very difficult to demonstrate because statistical power is reduced by the smaller sample sizes in subgroups, and patient selection narrows the range of variation in key clinical variables, which may further reduce the power to detect subgroup effects on outcome.

    Although the comparative effectiveness of PCI and CABG in patient subgroups was our particular focus (10), we found that outcomes in key clinical subgroups were reported too infrequently to permit drawing reliable conclusions about most clinical characteristics of interest. The most extensive evidence pertains to patients with diabetes and those with triple-vessel versus double-vessel disease.

    The adverse prognostic effect of diabetes has been reported consistently in patients undergoing coronary revascularization procedures and may be due to more extensive coronary disease at the time of revascularization, more rapid progression of coronary atherosclerosis in follow-up, or both factors. The finding of BARI that CABG reduced mortality compared with PCI among patients with diabetes, but not among patients without diabetes (64), has resulted in much debate. Summary data from 7 randomized trials that reported outcomes in this subgroup (Figure 4) shows that the overall survival advantage of CABG over PCI in patients with diabetes was small (0.9%) and was not statistically significant, but with wide CIs. This result is consistent with reports from several clinical registries that comparative survival after PCI and CABG is similar in patients with diabetes (138–140). Our finding supports the conclusion that there is clinical equipoise on this question, and that the ongoing randomized trials comparing CABG and PCI in patients with diabetes (such as FREEDOM [ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT0086450], VA CARDS [ClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT00326196], and CARDia [Coronary Artery Revascularization in Diabetes; 141]) are warranted.

    Four randomized trials reported a larger difference in survival between CABG and PCI in patients with triple-vessel disease than in patients with double-vessel disease. Although this evidence is inconclusive, it is provocative in light of the strong and statistically significant effect of the extent of coronary disease on the relative hazard after PCI or CABG reported by the Duke database and other large clinical registries (129, 130, 133). This hypothesis could be tested by pooling individual patient–level data from randomized trials of PCI and CABG conducted in patients with multivessel disease.

    Our study has limitations. It is a quantitative overview and is necessarily limited to the analysis of aggregate data from published trials. Subgroup data were incompletely and inconsistently reported; our analysis of subgroup effects may therefore be subject to publication bias if subgroups were selected for publication based in part on the outcomes. Five-year outcomes from the SoS trial (119) have not yet been published and were not available for analysis. Most important, no results from large ongoing trials using drug-eluting stents have been published.

    Our analysis has identified numerous gaps in evidence of the comparative effectiveness of PCI and CABG that are opportunities for future research. The paucity of published data of PCI and CABG outcomes according to patient characteristics suggests the value of a collaborative pooling of individual patient–level data from the randomized trials to enhance statistical power to identify subgroup effects and to reduce publication bias by including data from all trials. Clinical trials are also needed to assess whether the availability of drug-eluting stents has affected the comparative efficacy of PCI and CABG. These trials, which are under way, are particularly needed because pooled studies suggest no difference in survival and freedom from myocardial infarction between bare-metal stents and drug-eluting stents over the medium term. Recent safety concerns about drug-eluting stents emphasize the need for extended follow-up and trials large enough to detect clinically meaningful differences in outcomes.

    Previous SectionNext Section

    Article and Author Information

    • 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.

    Previous Section
     

    References

    1. 1.↵
      1. DeFrancesCJ,
      2. HallMJ
      2005 National Hospital Discharge Survey.Adv Data20071-19pmid:17691217
      DeFrances CJ, Hall MJ. 2005 National Hospital Discharge Survey. Adv Data. 2007:1-19. [PMID: 17691217]
      Medline
    2. 2.↵
      1. EagleKA,
      2. GuytonRA,
      3. DavidoffR,
      4. EdwardsFH,
      5. EwyGA,
      6. GardnerTJ
      et al.American College of CardiologyACC/AHA 2004 guideline update for coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Update the 1999 Guidelines for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery).Circulation2004110340-437pmid:15466654
      Eagle KA, Guyton RA, Davidoff R, Edwards FH, Ewy GA, Gardner TJ, et al.; American College of Cardiology. ACC/AHA 2004 guideline update for coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee to Update the 1999 Guidelines for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery). Circulation. 2004;110:e340-437. [PMID: 15466654].
    3. 3.↵
      1. YusufS,
      2. ZuckerD,
      3. PeduzziP,
      4. FisherLD,
      5. TakaroT,
      6. KennedyJW
      et al.Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists Collaboration.Lancet1994344563-70pmid:7914958
      Yusuf S, Zucker D, Peduzzi P, Fisher LD, Takaro T, Kennedy JW, et al. Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists Collaboration. Lancet. 1994;344:563-70. [PMID: 7914958]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    4. 4.↵
      1. SmithSC, Jr,
      2. FeldmanTE,
      3. HirshfeldJW, Jr,
      4. JacobsAK,
      5. KernMJ,
      6. KingSB, 3rd
      et al.American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice GuidelinesACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/SCAI Writing Committee to Update 2001 Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention).Circulation2006113166-286pmid:16490830
      Smith SC Jr, Feldman TE, Hirshfeld JW Jr, Jacobs AK, Kern MJ, King SB 3rd, et al.; American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. ACC/AHA/SCAI 2005 guideline update for percutaneous coronary intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (ACC/AHA/SCAI Writing Committee to Update 2001 Guidelines for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention). Circulation. 2006;113:e166-286. [PMID: 16490830]
      Medline
    5. 5.↵
      1. KatritsisDG,
      2. IoannidisJP
      Percutaneous coronary intervention versus conservative therapy in nonacute coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis.Circulation20051112906-12pmid:15927966
      Katritsis DG, Ioannidis JP. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus conservative therapy in nonacute coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. Circulation. 2005;111:2906-12. [PMID: 15927966]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    6. 6.↵
      1. BrophyJM,
      2. BelisleP,
      3. JosephL
      Evidence for use of coronary stents. A hierarchical bayesian meta-analysis.Ann Intern Med2003138777-86pmid:12755549
      Brophy JM, Belisle P, Joseph L. Evidence for use of coronary stents. A hierarchical bayesian meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138:777-86. [PMID: 12755549]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    7. 7.↵
      1. BabapulleMN,
      2. JosephL,
      3. BélisleP,
      4. BrophyJM,
      5. EisenbergMJ
      A hierarchical Bayesian meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials of drug-eluting stents.Lancet2004364583-91pmid:15313358
      Babapulle MN, Joseph L, Bélisle P, Brophy JM, Eisenberg MJ. A hierarchical Bayesian meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials of drug-eluting stents. Lancet. 2004;364:583-91. [PMID: 15313358]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    8. 8.↵
      1. SellkeFW,
      2. DiMaioJM,
      3. CaplanLR,
      4. FergusonTB,
      5. GardnerTJ,
      6. HiratzkaLF
      et al.American Heart AssociationComparing on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: numerous studies but few conclusions: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association council on cardiovascular surgery and anesthesia in collaboration with the interdisciplinary working group on quality of care and outcomes research.Circulation20051112858-64pmid:15927994
      Sellke FW, DiMaio JM, Caplan LR, Ferguson TB, Gardner TJ, Hiratzka LF, et al.; American Heart Association. Comparing on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: numerous studies but few conclusions: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association council on cardiovascular surgery and anesthesia in collaboration with the interdisciplinary working group on quality of care and outcomes research. Circulation. 2005;111:2858-64. [PMID: 15927994].
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    9. 9.↵
      1. ChengDC,
      2. BainbridgeD,
      3. MartinJE,
      4. NovickRJ
      Evidence-Based Perioperative Clinical Outcomes Research GroupDoes off-pump coronary artery bypass reduce mortality, morbidity, and resource utilization when compared with conventional coronary artery bypass? A meta-analysis of randomized trials.Anesthesiology2005102188-203pmid:15618803
      Cheng DC, Bainbridge D, Martin JE, Novick RJ; Evidence-Based Perioperative Clinical Outcomes Research Group. Does off-pump coronary artery bypass reduce mortality, morbidity, and resource utilization when compared with conventional coronary artery bypass? A meta-analysis of randomized trials. Anesthesiology. 2005;102:188-203. [PMID: 15618803]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    10. 10.↵
      Bravata DM, McDonald KM, Gienger AL, Sundaram V, Perez MV, Varghese R, et al. Comparative effectiveness of percutaneous coronary interventions and coronary artery bypass grafting for coronary artery disease. Comparative Effectiveness Review no. 5. (Prepared by Stanford-UCSF Evidence-based Practice Center under contract no. 290-02-0017.) Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. [Forthcoming]. Available at http://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm.
    11. 11.↵
      1. CooperH,
      2. HedgesL
      The Handbook of Research Synthesis.New YorkRussell Sage1994
      Cooper H, Hedges L. The Handbook of Research Synthesis. New York: Russell Sage; 1994.
    12. 12.↵
      1. EngelsEA,
      2. SchmidCH,
      3. TerrinN,
      4. OlkinI,
      5. LauJ
      Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: an empirical study of 125 meta-analyses.Stat Med2000191707-28pmid:10861773
      Engels EA, Schmid CH, Terrin N, Olkin I, Lau J. Heterogeneity and statistical significance in meta-analysis: an empirical study of 125 meta-analyses. Stat Med. 2000;19:1707-28. [PMID: 10861773]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    13. 13.↵
      Review Manager (RevMan). Version 4.2 for Windows.CopenhagenThe Nordic Cochrane Center, The Cochrane Collaboration2003
      Review Manager (RevMan). Version 4.2 for Windows. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Center, The Cochrane Collaboration; 2003.
    14. 14.↵
      1. ReevesBC,
      2. AngeliniGD,
      3. BryanAJ,
      4. TaylorFC,
      5. CrippsT,
      6. SpytTJ
      et al.A multi-centre randomised controlled trial of minimally invasive direct coronary bypass grafting versus percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with stenting for proximal stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery.Health Technol Assess200481-43pmid:15080865
      Reeves BC, Angelini GD, Bryan AJ, Taylor FC, Cripps T, Spyt TJ, et al. A multi-centre randomised controlled trial of minimally invasive direct coronary bypass grafting versus percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with stenting for proximal stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery. Health Technol Assess. 2004;8:1-43. [PMID: 15080865]
      MedlineWeb of Science
    15. 15.
      1. SerruysPW,
      2. UngerF,
      3. SousaJE,
      4. JateneA,
      5. BonnierHJ,
      6. SchönbergerJP
      et al.Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study GroupComparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease.N Engl J Med20013441117-24pmid:11297702
      Serruys PW, Unger F, Sousa JE, Jatene A, Bonnier HJ, Schönberger JP, et al.; Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study Group. Comparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:1117-24. [PMID: 11297702]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    16. 16.
      1. AbizaidA,
      2. CostaMA,
      3. CentemeroM,
      4. AbizaidAS,
      5. LegrandVM,
      6. LimetRV
      et al.Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study GroupClinical and economic impact of diabetes mellitus on percutaneous and surgical treatment of multivessel coronary disease patients: insights from the Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study (ARTS) trial.Circulation2001104533-8pmid:11479249
      Abizaid A, Costa MA, Centemero M, Abizaid AS, Legrand VM, Limet RV, et al.; Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study Group. Clinical and economic impact of diabetes mellitus on percutaneous and surgical treatment of multivessel coronary disease patients: insights from the Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study (ARTS) trial. Circulation. 2001;104:533-8. [PMID: 11479249]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    17. 17.
      1. AokiJ,
      2. OngAT,
      3. ArampatzisCA,
      4. VijaykumarM,
      5. Rodriguez GranilloGA,
      6. DiscoCM
      et al.Comparison of three-year outcomes after coronary stenting versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with multivessel coronary disease, including involvement of the left anterior descending coronary artery proximally (a subanalysis of the arterial revascularization therapies study trial).Am J Cardiol200494627-31pmid:15342295
      Aoki J, Ong AT, Arampatzis CA, Vijaykumar M, Rodriguez Granillo GA, Disco CM, et al. Comparison of three-year outcomes after coronary stenting versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with multivessel coronary disease, including involvement of the left anterior descending coronary artery proximally (a subanalysis of the arterial revascularization therapies study trial). Am J Cardiol. 2004;94:627-31. [PMID: 15342295]
      CrossRefMedline
    18. 18.
      1. AokiJ,
      2. OngAT,
      3. HoyeA,
      4. van HerwerdenLA,
      5. SousaJE,
      6. JateneA
      et al.Five year clinical effect of coronary stenting and coronary artery bypass grafting in renal insufficient patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: insights from ARTS trial.Eur Heart J2005261488-93pmid:15860519
      Aoki J, Ong AT, Hoye A, van Herwerden LA, Sousa JE, Jatene A, et al. Five year clinical effect of coronary stenting and coronary artery bypass grafting in renal insufficient patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: insights from ARTS trial. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:1488-93. [PMID: 15860519]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    19. 19.
      1. de FeyterPJ,
      2. SerruysPW,
      3. UngerF,
      4. BeyarR,
      5. de ValkV,
      6. MiloS
      et al.Bypass surgery versus stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease in patients with unstable angina compared with stable angina.Circulation20021052367-72pmid:12021222
      de Feyter PJ, Serruys PW, Unger F, Beyar R, de Valk V, Milo S, et al. Bypass surgery versus stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease in patients with unstable angina compared with stable angina. Circulation. 2002;105:2367-72. [PMID: 12021222]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    20. 20.
      1. GrubergL,
      2. MercadoN,
      3. MiloS,
      4. BoersmaE,
      5. DiscoC,
      6. van EsGA
      et al.Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study InvestigatorsImpact of body mass index on the outcome of patients with multivessel disease randomized to either coronary artery bypass grafting or stenting in the ARTS trial: The obesity paradox II?Am J Cardiol200595439-44pmid:15695125
      Gruberg L, Mercado N, Milo S, Boersma E, Disco C, van Es GA, et al.; Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study Investigators. Impact of body mass index on the outcome of patients with multivessel disease randomized to either coronary artery bypass grafting or stenting in the ARTS trial: The obesity paradox II? Am J Cardiol. 2005;95:439-44. [PMID: 15695125].
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    21. 21.
      1. IxJH,
      2. MercadoN,
      3. ShlipakMG,
      4. LemosPA,
      5. BoersmaE,
      6. LindeboomW
      et al.Association of chronic kidney disease with clinical outcomes after coronary revascularization: the Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study (ARTS).Am Heart J2005149512-9pmid:15864241
      Ix JH, Mercado N, Shlipak MG, Lemos PA, Boersma E, Lindeboom W, et al. Association of chronic kidney disease with clinical outcomes after coronary revascularization: the Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study (ARTS). Am Heart J. 2005;149:512-9. [PMID: 15864241]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    22. 22.
      1. LegrandVM,
      2. SerruysPW,
      3. UngerF,
      4. van HoutBA,
      5. VrolixMC,
      6. FransenGM
      et al.Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study (ARTS) InvestigatorsThree-year outcome after coronary stenting versus bypass surgery for the treatment of multivessel disease.Circulation20041091114-20pmid:14993134
      Legrand VM, Serruys PW, Unger F, van Hout BA, Vrolix MC, Fransen GM, et al.; Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study (ARTS) Investigators. Three-year outcome after coronary stenting versus bypass surgery for the treatment of multivessel disease. Circulation. 2004;109:1114-20. [PMID: 14993134]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    23. 23.
      1. SerruysPW,
      2. OngAT,
      3. van HerwerdenLA,
      4. SousaJE,
      5. JateneA,
      6. BonnierJJ
      et al.Five-year outcomes after coronary stenting versus bypass surgery for the treatment of multivessel disease: the final analysis of the Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study (ARTS) randomized trial.J Am Coll Cardiol200546575-81pmid:16098418
      Serruys PW, Ong AT, van Herwerden LA, Sousa JE, Jatene A, Bonnier JJ, et al. Five-year outcomes after coronary stenting versus bypass surgery for the treatment of multivessel disease: the final analysis of the Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study (ARTS) randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:575-81. [PMID: 16098418]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    24. 24.
      1. SerruysPW,
      2. UngerF,
      3. van HoutBA,
      4. van den BrandMJ,
      5. van HerwerdenLA,
      6. van EsGA
      et al.The ARTS study (Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study).Semin Interv Cardiol19994209-19pmid:10738354
      Serruys PW, Unger F, van Hout BA, van den Brand MJ, van Herwerden LA, van Es GA, et al. The ARTS study (Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study). Semin Interv Cardiol. 1999;4:209-19. [PMID: 10738354]
      Medline
    25. 25.
      The ARTS (Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study): background, goals and methods.Int J Cardiovasc Intervent1999241-50pmid:12623386
      The ARTS (Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study): background, goals and methods. Int J Cardiovasc Intervent. 1999;2:41-50.[PMID: 12623386]
      Medline
    26. 26.
      1. UngerF,
      2. SerruysPW,
      3. YacoubMH,
      4. IlsleyC,
      5. PaulsenPK,
      6. NielsenTT
      et al.Revascularization in multivessel disease: comparison between two-year outcomes of coronary bypass surgery and stenting.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg2003125809-20pmid:12698143
      Unger F, Serruys PW, Yacoub MH, Ilsley C, Paulsen PK, Nielsen TT, et al. Revascularization in multivessel disease: comparison between two-year outcomes of coronary bypass surgery and stenting. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2003;125:809-20. [PMID: 12698143]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    27. 27.
      1. van den BrandMJ,
      2. RensingBJ,
      3. MorelMA,
      4. FoleyDP,
      5. de ValkV,
      6. BreemanA
      et al.The effect of completeness of revascularization on event-free survival at one year in the ARTS trial.J Am Coll Cardiol200239559-64pmid:11849851
      van den Brand MJ, Rensing BJ, Morel MA, Foley DP, de Valk V, Breeman A, et al. The effect of completeness of revascularization on event-free survival at one year in the ARTS trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39:559-64. [PMID: 11849851]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    28. 28.↵
      1. MorrisonDA,
      2. SethiG,
      3. SacksJ,
      4. HendersonW,
      5. GroverF,
      6. SedlisS
      et al.Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation (AWESOME)Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: a multicenter, randomized trial. Investigators of the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, the Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation (AWESOME).J Am Coll Cardiol200138143-9pmid:11451264
      Morrison DA, Sethi G, Sacks J, Henderson W, Grover F, Sedlis S, et al.; Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation (AWESOME). Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: a multicenter, randomized trial. Investigators of the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, the Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation (AWESOME). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38:143-9. [PMID: 11451264].
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    29. 29.
      1. MorrisonDA,
      2. SethiG,
      3. SacksJ,
      4. GroverF,
      5. SedlisS,
      6. EspositoR
      et al.A multicenter, randomized trial of percutaneous coronary intervention versus bypass surgery in high-risk unstable angina patients. The AWESOME (Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, angina with extremely serious operative mortality evaluation) investigators from the Cooperative Studies Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs.Control Clin Trials199920601-19pmid:10588300
      Morrison DA, Sethi G, Sacks J, Grover F, Sedlis S, Esposito R, et al. A multicenter, randomized trial of percutaneous coronary intervention versus bypass surgery in high-risk unstable angina patients. The AWESOME (Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, angina with extremely serious operative mortality evaluation) investigators from the Cooperative Studies Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs. Control Clin Trials. 1999;20:601-19. [PMID: 10588300]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    30. 30.
      1. MorrisonDA,
      2. SethiG,
      3. SacksJ,
      4. HendersonWG,
      5. GroverF,
      6. SedlisS
      et al.Investigators of the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality EvaluationPercutaneous coronary intervention versus repeat bypass surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia: AWESOME randomized trial and registry experience with post-CABG patients.J Am Coll Cardiol2002401951-4pmid:12475454
      Morrison DA, Sethi G, Sacks J, Henderson WG, Grover F, Sedlis S, et al.; Investigators of the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus repeat bypass surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia: AWESOME randomized trial and registry experience with post-CABG patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:1951-4. [PMID: 12475454]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    31. 31.↵
      1. RamanathanKB,
      2. WeimanDS,
      3. SacksJ,
      4. MorrisonDA,
      5. SedlisS,
      6. SethiG
      et al.Percutaneous intervention versus coronary bypass surgery for patients older than 70 years of age with high-risk unstable angina.Ann Thorac Surg2005801340-6pmid:16181866
      Ramanathan KB, Weiman DS, Sacks J, Morrison DA, Sedlis S, Sethi G, et al. Percutaneous intervention versus coronary bypass surgery for patients older than 70 years of age with high-risk unstable angina. Ann Thorac Surg. 2005;80:1340-6. [PMID: 16181866]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    32. 32.
      1. RumsfeldJS,
      2. MagidDJ,
      3. PlomondonME,
      4. SacksJ,
      5. HendersonW,
      6. HlatkyM
      et al.Department of Veterans Affairs Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality (AWESOME) InvestigatorsHealth-related quality of life after percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass surgery in high-risk patients with medically refractory ischemia.J Am Coll Cardiol2003411732-8pmid:12767656
      Rumsfeld JS, Magid DJ, Plomondon ME, Sacks J, Henderson W, Hlatky M, et al.; Department of Veterans Affairs Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality (AWESOME) Investigators. Health-related quality of life after percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass surgery in high-risk patients with medically refractory ischemia. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;41:1732-8. [PMID: 12767656].
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    33. 33.
      1. SedlisSP,
      2. MorrisonDA,
      3. LorinJD,
      4. EspositoR,
      5. SethiG,
      6. SacksJ
      et al.Investigators of the Dept. of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, the Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation (AWESOME)Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass graft surgery for diabetic patients with unstable angina and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: outcome of diabetic patients in the AWESOME randomized trial and registry.J Am Coll Cardiol2002401555-66pmid:12427406
      Sedlis SP, Morrison DA, Lorin JD, Esposito R, Sethi G, Sacks J, et al.; Investigators of the Dept. of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, the Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation (AWESOME). Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass graft surgery for diabetic patients with unstable angina and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: outcome of diabetic patients in the AWESOME randomized trial and registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:1555-66. [PMID: 12427406]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    34. 34.
      1. SedlisSP,
      2. RamanathanKB,
      3. MorrisonDA,
      4. SethiG,
      5. SacksJ,
      6. HendersonW
      Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation (AWESOME) InvestigatorsOutcome of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass grafting for patients with low left ventricular ejection fractions, unstable angina pectoris, and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass (the AWESOME Randomized Trial and Registry).Am J Cardiol200494118-20pmid:15219521
      Sedlis SP, Ramanathan KB, Morrison DA, Sethi G, Sacks J, Henderson W; Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation (AWESOME) Investigators. Outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass grafting for patients with low left ventricular ejection fractions, unstable angina pectoris, and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass (the AWESOME Randomized Trial and Registry). Am J Cardiol. 2004;94:118-20. [PMID: 15219521].
      MedlineWeb of Science
    35. 35.
      1. StroupeKT,
      2. MorrisonDA,
      3. HlatkyMA,
      4. BarnettPG,
      5. CaoL,
      6. LyttleC,
      7. HynesDM,
      8. HendersonWG
      Investigators of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program #385 (AWESOME: Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation)Cost-effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafts versus percutaneous coronary intervention for revascularization of high-risk patients.Circulation20061141251-7pmid:16966588
      Stroupe KT, Morrison DA, Hlatky MA, Barnett PG, Cao L, Lyttle C, Hynes DM, Henderson WG; Investigators of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program #385 (AWESOME: Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation). Cost-effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafts versus percutaneous coronary intervention for revascularization of high-risk patients. Circulation. 2006;114:1251-7. [PMID: 16966588]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    36. 36.
      Protocol for the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation.Circulation199186SupplV1-27
      Protocol for the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation. Circulation. 1991;86(Suppl):V1-27.
    37. 37.↵
      Influence of diabetes on 5-year mortality and morbidity in a randomized trial comparing CABG and PTCA in patients with multivessel disease: the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI).Circulation1997961761-9pmid:9323059
      Influence of diabetes on 5-year mortality and morbidity in a randomized trial comparing CABG and PTCA in patients with multivessel disease: the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). Circulation. 1997;96:1761-9. [PMID: 9323059]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    38. 38.↵
      Seven-year outcome in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) by treatment and diabetic status.J Am Coll Cardiol2000351122-9pmid:10758950
      Seven-year outcome in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) by treatment and diabetic status. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;35:1122-9. [PMID: 10758950]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    39. 39.
      1. AldermanEL,
      2. KipKE,
      3. WhitlowPL,
      4. BashoreT,
      5. FortinD,
      6. BourassaMG
      et al.Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation. Native coronary disease progression exceeds failed revascularization as cause of angina after five years in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI).J Am Coll Cardiol200444766-74pmid:15312856
      Alderman EL, Kip KE, Whitlow PL, Bashore T, Fortin D, Bourassa MG, et al.; Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation. Native coronary disease progression exceeds failed revascularization as cause of angina after five years in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;44:766-74. [PMID: 15312856].
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    40. 40.↵
      1. BergerPB,
      2. VelianouJL,
      3. Aslanidou VlachosH,
      4. FeitF,
      5. JacobsAK,
      6. FaxonDP
      et al.BARI InvestigatorsSurvival following coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in anatomic subsets in which coronary artery bypass surgery improves survival compared with medical therapy. Results from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI).J Am Coll Cardiol2001381440-9pmid:11691521
      Berger PB, Velianou JL, Aslanidou Vlachos H, Feit F, Jacobs AK, Faxon DP, et al.; BARI Investigators. Survival following coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in anatomic subsets in which coronary artery bypass surgery improves survival compared with medical therapy. Results from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38:1440-9. [PMID: 11691521]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    41. 41.
      1. BittnerV,
      2. HardisonR,
      3. KelseySF,
      4. WeinerBH,
      5. JacobsAK,
      6. SopkoG
      Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization InvestigationNon-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels predict five-year outcome in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI).Circulation20021062537-42pmid:12427648
      Bittner V, Hardison R, Kelsey SF, Weiner BH, Jacobs AK, Sopko G; Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation. Non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels predict five-year outcome in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). Circulation. 2002;106:2537-42. [PMID: 12427648]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    42. 42.
      1. BourassaMG,
      2. KipKE,
      3. JacobsAK,
      4. JonesRH,
      5. SopkoG,
      6. RosenAD
      et al.Is a strategy of intended incomplete percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty revascularization acceptable in nondiabetic patients who are candidates for coronary artery bypass graft surgery? The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI).J Am Coll Cardiol1999331627-36pmid:10334434
      Bourassa MG, Kip KE, Jacobs AK, Jones RH, Sopko G, Rosen AD, et al. Is a strategy of intended incomplete percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty revascularization acceptable in nondiabetic patients who are candidates for coronary artery bypass graft surgery? The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;33:1627-36. [PMID: 10334434]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    43. 43.
      1. BourassaMG,
      2. RoubinGS,
      3. DetreKM,
      4. SopkoG,
      5. KroneRJ,
      6. AttabutoMJ
      et al.Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation: patient screening, selection, and recruitment.Am J Cardiol1995753C-8Cpmid:7892820
      Bourassa MG, Roubin GS, Detre KM, Sopko G, Krone RJ, Attabuto MJ, et al. Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation: patient screening, selection, and recruitment. Am J Cardiol. 1995;75:3C-8C. [PMID: 7892820]
      CrossRefMedline
    44. 44.
      1. BrooksMM,
      2. DetreKM
      The design, patient population and outcomes from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) randomized trial and registries.Semin Interv Cardiol19994191-9pmid:10738352
      Brooks MM, Detre KM. The design, patient population and outcomes from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) randomized trial and registries. Semin Interv Cardiol. 1999;4:191-9. [PMID: 10738352]
      Medline
    45. 45.
      1. BrooksMM,
      2. JonesRH,
      3. BachRG,
      4. ChaitmanBR,
      5. KernMJ,
      6. OrszulakTA
      et al.Predictors of mortality and mortality from cardiac causes in the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation (BARI) randomized trial and registry. For the BARI Investigators.Circulation20001012682-9pmid:10851204
      Brooks MM, Jones RH, Bach RG, Chaitman BR, Kern MJ, Orszulak TA, et al. Predictors of mortality and mortality from cardiac causes in the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation (BARI) randomized trial and registry. For the BARI Investigators. Circulation. 2000;101:2682-9. [PMID: 10851204]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    46. 46.
      1. ChaitmanBR,
      2. RosenAD,
      3. WilliamsDO,
      4. BourassaMG,
      5. AguirreFV,
      6. PittB
      et al.Myocardial infarction and cardiac mortality in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) randomized trial.Circulation1997962162-70pmid:9337185
      Chaitman BR, Rosen AD, Williams DO, Bourassa MG, Aguirre FV, Pitt B, et al. Myocardial infarction and cardiac mortality in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) randomized trial. Circulation. 1997;96:2162-70. [PMID: 9337185]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    47. 47.
      1. DetreKM,
      2. GuoP,
      3. HolubkovR,
      4. CaliffRM,
      5. SopkoG,
      6. BachR
      et al.Coronary revascularization in diabetic patients: a comparison of the randomized and observational components of the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI).Circulation199999633-40pmid:9950660
      Detre KM, Guo P, Holubkov R, Califf RM, Sopko G, Bach R, et al. Coronary revascularization in diabetic patients: a comparison of the randomized and observational components of the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). Circulation. 1999;99:633-40. [PMID: 9950660]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    48. 48.
      1. GibbonsRJ,
      2. MillerDD,
      3. LiuP,
      4. GuoP,
      5. BrooksMM,
      6. SchwaigerM
      Similarity of ventricular function in patients alive 5 years after randomization to surgery or angioplasty in the BARI trial.Circulation20011031076-82pmid:11222469
      Gibbons RJ, Miller DD, Liu P, Guo P, Brooks MM, Schwaiger M. Similarity of ventricular function in patients alive 5 years after randomization to surgery or angioplasty in the BARI trial. Circulation. 2001;103:1076-82. [PMID: 11222469]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    49. 49.
      1. GurmHS,
      2. WhitlowPL,
      3. KipKE
      BARI InvestigatorsThe impact of body mass index on short- and long-term outcomes inpatients undergoing coronary revascularization. Insights from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI).J Am Coll Cardiol200239834-40pmid:11869849
      Gurm HS, Whitlow PL, Kip KE; BARI Investigators. The impact of body mass index on short- and long-term outcomes inpatients undergoing coronary revascularization. Insights from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;39:834-40. [PMID: 11869849]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    50. 50.
      Hlatky MA, Bacon C, Boothroyd D, Mahanna E, Reves JG, Newman MF, et al. Cognitive function 5 years after randomization to coronary angioplasty or coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Circulation. 1997;96:II-11-4; discussion II-15. [PMID: 9386068]
    51. 51.
      1. HlatkyMA,
      2. BoothroydD,
      3. HorineS,
      4. WinstonC,
      5. BrooksMM,
      6. RogersW
      et al.Employment after coronary angioplasty or coronary bypass surgery in patients employed at the time of revascularization.Ann Intern Med1998129543-7pmid:9758574
      Hlatky MA, Boothroyd D, Horine S, Winston C, Brooks MM, Rogers W, et al. Employment after coronary angioplasty or coronary bypass surgery in patients employed at the time of revascularization. Ann Intern Med. 1998;129:543-7. [PMID: 9758574]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    52. 52.
      1. HlatkyMA,
      2. BoothroydDB,
      3. MelsopKA,
      4. BrooksMM,
      5. MarkDB,
      6. PittB
      et al.Medical costs and quality of life 10 to 12 years after randomization to angioplasty or bypass surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease.Circulation20041101960-6pmid:15451795
      Hlatky MA, Boothroyd DB, Melsop KA, Brooks MM, Mark DB, Pitt B, et al. Medical costs and quality of life 10 to 12 years after randomization to angioplasty or bypass surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2004;110:1960-6. [PMID: 15451795]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    53. 53.
      1. HlatkyMA,
      2. CharlesED,
      3. NobregaF,
      4. GelmanK,
      5. JohnstoneI,
      6. MelvinJ
      et al.Initial functional and economic status of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease randomized in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI).Am J Cardiol19957534C-41Cpmid:7892821
      Hlatky MA, Charles ED, Nobrega F, Gelman K, Johnstone I, Melvin J, et al. Initial functional and economic status of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease randomized in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). Am J Cardiol. 1995;75:34C-41C. [PMID: 7892821]
      CrossRefMedline
    54. 54.
      1. HlatkyMA,
      2. RogersWJ,
      3. JohnstoneI,
      4. BoothroydD,
      5. BrooksMM,
      6. PittB
      et al.Medical care costs and quality of life after randomization to coronary angioplasty or coronary bypass surgery. Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Investigators.N Engl J Med199733692-9pmid:8988886
      Hlatky MA, Rogers WJ, Johnstone I, Boothroyd D, Brooks MM, Pitt B, et al. Medical care costs and quality of life after randomization to coronary angioplasty or coronary bypass surgery. Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1997;336:92-9. [PMID: 8988886]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    55. 55.↵
      1. JacobsAK,
      2. KelseySF,
      3. BrooksMM,
      4. FaxonDP,
      5. ChaitmanBR,
      6. BittnerV
      et al.Better outcome for women compared with men undergoing coronary revascularization: a report from the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation (BARI).Circulation1998981279-85pmid:9751675
      Jacobs AK, Kelsey SF, Brooks MM, Faxon DP, Chaitman BR, Bittner V, et al. Better outcome for women compared with men undergoing coronary revascularization: a report from the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation (BARI). Circulation. 1998;98:1279-85. [PMID: 9751675]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    56. 56.
      1. KipKE,
      2. AldermanEL,
      3. BourassaMG,
      4. BrooksMM,
      5. SchwartzL,
      6. HolmesDR, Jr
      et al.Differential influence of diabetes mellitus on increased jeopardized myocardium after initial angioplasty or bypass surgery: bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation.Circulation20021051914-20pmid:11997277
      Kip KE, Alderman EL, Bourassa MG, Brooks MM, Schwartz L, Holmes DR Jr, et al. Differential influence of diabetes mellitus on increased jeopardized myocardium after initial angioplasty or bypass surgery: bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation. Circulation. 2002;105:1914-20. [PMID: 11997277]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    57. 57.↵
      1. MullanyCJ,
      2. MockMB,
      3. BrooksMM,
      4. KelseySF,
      5. KellerNM,
      6. Sutton-TyrrellK
      et al.Effect of age in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) randomized trial.Ann Thorac Surg199967396-403pmid:10197660
      Mullany CJ, Mock MB, Brooks MM, Kelsey SF, Keller NM, Sutton-Tyrrell K, et al. Effect of age in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) randomized trial. Ann Thorac Surg. 1999;67:396-403. [PMID: 10197660]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    58. 58.
      1. RihalCS,
      2. Sutton-TyrrellK,
      3. GuoP,
      4. KellerNM,
      5. JandovaR,
      6. SellersMA
      et al.Increased incidence of periprocedural complications among patients with peripheral vascular disease undergoing myocardial revascularization in the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation.Circulation1999100171-7pmid:10402447
      Rihal CS, Sutton-Tyrrell K, Guo P, Keller NM, Jandova R, Sellers MA, et al. Increased incidence of periprocedural complications among patients with peripheral vascular disease undergoing myocardial revascularization in the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation. Circulation. 1999;100:171-7. [PMID: 10402447]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    59. 59.
      1. RogersWJ,
      2. AldermanEL,
      3. ChaitmanBR,
      4. DiSciascioG,
      5. HoranM,
      6. LytleB
      et al.Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI): baseline clinical and angiographic data.Am J Cardiol1995759C-17Cpmid:7892823
      Rogers WJ, Alderman EL, Chaitman BR, DiSciascio G, Horan M, Lytle B, et al. Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI): baseline clinical and angiographic data. Am J Cardiol. 1995;75:9C-17C. [PMID: 7892823]
      CrossRefMedline
    60. 60.
      1. Sutton-TyrrellK,
      2. RihalC,
      3. SellersMA,
      4. BurekK,
      5. TrudelJ,
      6. RoubinG
      et al.Long-term prognostic value of clinically evident noncoronary vascular disease in patients undergoing coronary revascularization in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI).Am J Cardiol199881375-81pmid:9485122
      Sutton-Tyrrell K, Rihal C, Sellers MA, Burek K, Trudel J, Roubin G, et al. Long-term prognostic value of clinically evident noncoronary vascular disease in patients undergoing coronary revascularization in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). Am J Cardiol. 1998;81:375-81. [PMID: 9485122]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    61. 61.
      1. SzczechLA,
      2. BestPJ,
      3. CrowleyE,
      4. BrooksMM,
      5. BergerPB,
      6. BittnerV
      et al.Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) InvestigatorsOutcomes of patients with chronic renal insufficiency in the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation.Circulation20021052253-8pmid:12010906
      Szczech LA, Best PJ, Crowley E, Brooks MM, Berger PB, Bittner V, et al.; Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Investigators. Outcomes of patients with chronic renal insufficiency in the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation. Circulation. 2002;105:2253-8. [PMID: 12010906]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    62. 62.↵
      BARI InvestigatorsThe final 10-year follow-up results from the BARI randomized trial.J Am Coll Cardiol2007491600-6pmid:17433949
      BARI Investigators. The final 10-year follow-up results from the BARI randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49:1600-6. [PMID: 17433949]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    63. 63.
      Five-year clinical and functional outcome comparing bypass surgery and angioplasty in patients with multivessel coronary disease. A multicenter randomized trial. Writing Group for the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Investigators.JAMA1997277715-21pmid:9042843
      Five-year clinical and functional outcome comparing bypass surgery and angioplasty in patients with multivessel coronary disease. A multicenter randomized trial. Writing Group for the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Investigators. JAMA. 1997;277:715-21. [PMID: 9042843]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    64. 64.↵
      Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with angioplasty in patients with multivessel disease. The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Investigators.N Engl J Med1996335217-25pmid:8657237
      Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with angioplasty in patients with multivessel disease. The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:217-25. [PMID: 8657237]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    65. 65.
      First-year results of CABRI (Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularisation Investigation). CABRI Trial Participants.Lancet19953461179-84pmid:7475656
      First-year results of CABRI (Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularisation Investigation). CABRI Trial Participants. Lancet. 1995;346:1179-84. [PMID: 7475656]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    66. 66.
      1. KurbaanAS,
      2. BowkerTJ,
      3. IlsleyCD,
      4. FoaleRA,
      5. SigwartU,
      6. RickardsAF
      The effect of adjusting for baseline risk factors and post revascularisation coronary disease on comparisons between coronary angioplasty and bypass surgery.Int J Cardiol200177207-14pmid:11182184
      Kurbaan AS, Bowker TJ, Ilsley CD, Foale RA, Sigwart U, Rickards AF. The effect of adjusting for baseline risk factors and post revascularisation coronary disease on comparisons between coronary angioplasty and bypass surgery. Int J Cardiol. 2001;77:207-14. [PMID: 11182184]
      Medline
    67. 67.
      1. KurbaanAS,
      2. BowkerTJ,
      3. IlsleyCD,
      4. SigwartU,
      5. RickardsAF
      on behalf of the CABRI Investigators (Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularization Investigation)Difference in the mortality of the CABRI diabetic and nondiabetic populations and its relation to coronary artery disease and the revascularization mode.Am J Cardiol200187947-50, A3pmid:11305983
      Kurbaan AS, Bowker TJ, Ilsley CD, Sigwart U, Rickards AF, on behalf of the CABRI Investigators (Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularization Investigation). Difference in the mortality of the CABRI diabetic and nondiabetic populations and its relation to coronary artery disease and the revascularization mode. Am J Cardiol. 2001;87:947-50, A3. [PMID: 11305983]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    68. 68.
      1. KurbaanAS,
      2. BowkerTJ,
      3. IlsleyCD,
      4. RickardsAF
      Impact of postangioplasty restenosis on comparisons of outcome between angioplasty and bypass grafting. Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularisation Investigation (CABRI) Investigators.Am J Cardiol199882272-6pmid:9708652
      Kurbaan AS, Bowker TJ, Ilsley CD, Rickards AF. Impact of postangioplasty restenosis on comparisons of outcome between angioplasty and bypass grafting. Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularisation Investigation (CABRI) Investigators. Am J Cardiol. 1998;82:272-6. [PMID: 9708652]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    69. 69.
      1. KurbaanAS,
      2. BowkerTJ,
      3. RickardsAF
      Differential restenosis rate of individual coronary artery sites after multivessel angioplasty: implications for revascularization strategy. CABRI Investigators. Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularisation Investigation.Am Heart J1998135703-8pmid:9539489
      Kurbaan AS, Bowker TJ, Rickards AF. Differential restenosis rate of individual coronary artery sites after multivessel angioplasty: implications for revascularization strategy. CABRI Investigators. Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularisation Investigation. Am Heart J. 1998;135:703-8. [PMID: 9539489]
      Medline
    70. 70.
      1. KurbaanAS,
      2. BowkerTJ,
      3. RickardsAF
      Trials of angioplasty and surgery: CABRI.Semin Interv Cardiol19994179-84pmid:10738350
      Kurbaan AS, Bowker TJ, Rickards AF. Trials of angioplasty and surgery: CABRI. Semin Interv Cardiol. 1999;4:179-84. [PMID: 10738350]
      Medline
    71. 71.
      1. WährborgP
      Quality of life after coronary angioplasty or bypass surgery. 1-year follow-up in the Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularization investigation (CABRI) trial.Eur Heart J199920653-8pmid:10208785
      Währborg P. Quality of life after coronary angioplasty or bypass surgery. 1-year follow-up in the Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularization investigation (CABRI) trial. Eur Heart J. 1999;20:653-8. [PMID: 10208785]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    72. 72.
      1. KingSB, 3rd,
      2. LemboNJ,
      3. WeintraubWS,
      4. KosinskiAS,
      5. BarnhartHX,
      6. KutnerMH
      et al.A randomized trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST).N Engl J Med19943311044-50pmid:8090163
      King SB 3rd, Lembo NJ, Weintraub WS, Kosinski AS, Barnhart HX, Kutner MH, et al. A randomized trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST). N Engl J Med. 1994;331:1044-50. [PMID: 8090163]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    73. 73.
      1. AlazrakiNP,
      2. KrawczynskaEG,
      3. KosinskiAS,
      4. DePueyEG, 3rd,
      5. ZifferJA,
      6. TaylorAT, Jr
      et al.Prognostic value of thallium-201 single-photon emission computed tomography for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease after revascularization (the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial [EAST]).Am J Cardiol1999841369-74pmid:10606106
      Alazraki NP, Krawczynska EG, Kosinski AS, DePuey EG 3rd, Ziffer JA, Taylor AT Jr, et al. Prognostic value of thallium-201 single-photon emission computed tomography for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease after revascularization (the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial [EAST]). Am J Cardiol. 1999;84:1369-74. [PMID: 10606106]
      CrossRefMedline
    74. 74.
      1. BeckerER,
      2. MauldinPD,
      3. CullerSD,
      4. KosinskiAS,
      5. WeintraubWS,
      6. KingSB
      Applying the resource-based relative value scale to the Emory angioplasty versus surgery trial.Am J Cardiol200085685-91pmid:12004793
      Becker ER, Mauldin PD, Culler SD, Kosinski AS, Weintraub WS, King SB. Applying the resource-based relative value scale to the Emory angioplasty versus surgery trial. Am J Cardiol. 2000;85:685-91. [PMID: 12004793]
      Medline
    75. 75.
      1. KingSB, 3rd,
      2. LemboNJ,
      3. WeintraubWS,
      4. KosinskiAS,
      5. BarnhartHX,
      6. KutnerMH
      Emory Angioplasty Versus Surgery Trial (EAST): design, recruitment, and baseline description of patients.Am J Cardiol19957542C-59Cpmid:7892822
      King SB 3rd, Lembo NJ, Weintraub WS, Kosinski AS, Barnhart HX, Kutner MH. Emory Angioplasty Versus Surgery Trial (EAST): design, recruitment, and baseline description of patients. Am J Cardiol. 1995;75:42C-59C. [PMID: 7892822]
      CrossRefMedline
    76. 76.
      1. WeintraubWS,
      2. MauldinPD,
      3. BeckerE,
      4. KosinskiAS,
      5. KingSB, 3rd
      A comparison of the costs of and quality of life after coronary angioplasty or coronary surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease. Results from the Emory Angioplasty Versus Surgery Trial (EAST).Circulation1995922831-40pmid:7586249
      Weintraub WS, Mauldin PD, Becker E, Kosinski AS, King SB 3rd. A comparison of the costs of and quality of life after coronary angioplasty or coronary surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease. Results from the Emory Angioplasty Versus Surgery Trial (EAST). Circulation. 1995;92:2831-40. [PMID: 7586249]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    77. 77.
      1. WeintraubWS,
      2. BeckerER,
      3. MauldinPD,
      4. CullerS,
      5. KosinskiAS,
      6. KingSB, 3rd
      Costs of revascularization over eight years in the randomized and eligible patients in the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST).Am J Cardiol200086747-52pmid:11018194
      Weintraub WS, Becker ER, Mauldin PD, Culler S, Kosinski AS, King SB 3rd. Costs of revascularization over eight years in the randomized and eligible patients in the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST). Am J Cardiol. 2000;86:747-52. [PMID: 11018194]
      CrossRefMedline
    78. 78.
      1. ZhaoXQ,
      2. BrownBG,
      3. StewartDK,
      4. HillgerLA,
      5. BarnhartHX,
      6. KosinskiAS
      et al.Effectiveness of revascularization in the Emory angioplasty versus surgery trial. A randomized comparison of coronary angioplasty with bypass surgery.Circulation1996931954-62pmid:8640968
      Zhao XQ, Brown BG, Stewart DK, Hillger LA, Barnhart HX, Kosinski AS, et al. Effectiveness of revascularization in the Emory angioplasty versus surgery trial. A randomized comparison of coronary angioplasty with bypass surgery. Circulation. 1996;93:1954-62. [PMID: 8640968]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    79. 79.
      1. KingSB, 3rd
      The Emory Angioplasty vs Surgery Trial (EAST).Semin Interv Cardiol19994185-90pmid:10738351
      King SB 3rd. The Emory Angioplasty vs Surgery Trial (EAST). Semin Interv Cardiol. 1999;4:185-90. [PMID: 10738351]
      Medline
    80. 80.↵
      1. KingSB, 3rd,
      2. KosinskiAS,
      3. GuytonRA,
      4. LemboNJ,
      5. WeintraubWS
      Eight-year mortality in the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST).J Am Coll Cardiol2000351116-21pmid:10758949
      King SB 3rd, Kosinski AS, Guyton RA, Lembo NJ, Weintraub WS. Eight-year mortality in the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2000;35:1116-21. [PMID: 10758949]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    81. 81.
      1. ZhaoXQ,
      2. KosinskiAS,
      3. BarnhartHX,
      4. SuperkoHR,
      5. KingSB, 3rd
      Prediction of native coronary artery disease progression following PTCA or CABG in the Emory Angioplasty Versus Surgery Trial.Med Sci Monit20039CR48-54pmid:12601286
      Zhao XQ, Kosinski AS, Barnhart HX, Superko HR, King SB 3rd. Prediction of native coronary artery disease progression following PTCA or CABG in the Emory Angioplasty Versus Surgery Trial. Med Sci Monit. 2003;9:CR48-54. [PMID: 12601286]
      Medline
    82. 82.
      1. RodriguezA,
      2. BoullonF,
      3. Perez-BaliñoN,
      4. PaviottiC,
      5. LiprandiMI,
      6. PalaciosIF
      Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI): in-hospital results and 1-year follow-up. ERACI Group.J Am Coll Cardiol1993221060-7pmid:8409041
      Rodriguez A, Boullon F, Perez-Baliño N, Paviotti C, Liprandi MI, Palacios IF. Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI): in-hospital results and 1-year follow-up. ERACI Group. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22:1060-7. [PMID: 8409041]
      Abstract
    83. 83.
      1. RodriguezA,
      2. MeleE,
      3. PeyregneE,
      4. BullonF,
      5. Perez-BaliñoN,
      6. LiprandiMI
      et al.Three-year follow-up of the Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI).J Am Coll Cardiol1996271178-84pmid:8609339
      Rodriguez A, Mele E, Peyregne E, Bullon F, Perez-Baliño N, Liprandi MI, et al. Three-year follow-up of the Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI). J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;27:1178-84. [PMID: 8609339]
      Abstract
    84. 84.
      1. RodriguezA,
      2. BernardiV,
      3. NaviaJ,
      4. BaldiJ,
      5. GrinfeldL,
      6. MartinezJ
      et al.Argentine randomized study: coronary angioplasty with stenting versus coronary bypass surgery in patients with multiple-vessel disease (ERACI II): 30-day and one-year follow-up results. ERACI II Investigators.J Am Coll Cardiol20013751-8pmid:11153772
      Rodriguez A, Bernardi V, Navia J, Baldi J, Grinfeld L, Martinez J, et al. Argentine randomized study: coronary angioplasty with stenting versus coronary bypass surgery in patients with multiple-vessel disease (ERACI II): 30-day and one-year follow-up results. ERACI II Investigators. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37:51-8. [PMID: 11153772]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    85. 85.
      1. RodriguezA,
      2. Rodríguez AlemparteM,
      3. BaldiJ,
      4. NaviaJ,
      5. DelacasaA,
      6. VogelD
      et al.Coronary stenting versus coronary bypass surgery in patients with multiple vessel disease and significant proximal LAD stenosis: results from the ERACI II study.Heart200389184-8pmid:12527674
      Rodriguez A, Rodríguez Alemparte M, Baldi J, Navia J, Delacasa A, Vogel D, et al. Coronary stenting versus coronary bypass surgery in patients with multiple vessel disease and significant proximal LAD stenosis: results from the ERACI II study. Heart. 2003;89:184-8. [PMID: 12527674]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    86. 86.↵
      1. RodriguezAE,
      2. BaldiJ,
      3. Fernández PereiraC,
      4. NaviaJ,
      5. Rodriguez AlemparteM,
      6. DelacasaA
      et al.ERACI II InvestigatorsFive-year follow-up of the Argentine randomized trial of coronary angioplasty with stenting versus coronary bypass surgery in patients with multiple vessel disease (ERACI II).J Am Coll Cardiol200546582-8pmid:16098419
      Rodriguez AE, Baldi J, Fernández Pereira C, Navia J, Rodriguez Alemparte M, Delacasa A, et al.; ERACI II Investigators. Five-year follow-up of the Argentine randomized trial of coronary angioplasty with stenting versus coronary bypass surgery in patients with multiple vessel disease (ERACI II). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:582-8. [PMID: 16098419]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    87. 87.
      1. HammCW,
      2. ReimersJ,
      3. IschingerT,
      4. RupprechtHJ,
      5. BergerJ,
      6. BleifeldW
      A randomized study of coronary angioplasty compared with bypass surgery in patients with symptomatic multivessel coronary disease. German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation (GABI).N Engl J Med19943311037-43pmid:8090162
      Hamm CW, Reimers J, Ischinger T, Rupprecht HJ, Berger J, Bleifeld W. A randomized study of coronary angioplasty compared with bypass surgery in patients with symptomatic multivessel coronary disease. German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation (GABI). N Engl J Med. 1994;331:1037-43. [PMID: 8090162]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    88. 88.↵
      1. KaehlerJ,
      2. KoesterR,
      3. BillmannW,
      4. SchroederC,
      5. RupprechtHJ,
      6. IschingerT
      et al.13-year follow-up of the German angioplasty bypass surgery investigation.Eur Heart J2005262148-53pmid:15975991
      Kaehler J, Koester R, Billmann W, Schroeder C, Rupprecht HJ, Ischinger T, et al. 13-year follow-up of the German angioplasty bypass surgery investigation. Eur Heart J. 2005;26:2148-53. [PMID: 15975991]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    89. 89.
      1. RupprechtHJ,
      2. HammC,
      3. IschingerT,
      4. DietzU,
      5. ReimersJ,
      6. MeyerJ
      Angiographic follow-up results of a randomized study on angioplasty versus bypass surgery (GABI trial). GABI Study Group.Eur Heart J1996171192-8pmid:8869860
      Rupprecht HJ, Hamm C, Ischinger T, Dietz U, Reimers J, Meyer J. Angiographic follow-up results of a randomized study on angioplasty versus bypass surgery (GABI trial). GABI Study Group. Eur Heart J. 1996;17:1192-8. [PMID: 8869860]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    90. 90.
      1. DrenthDJ,
      2. VeegerNJ,
      3. WinterJB,
      4. GrandjeanJG,
      5. MarianiMA,
      6. van BovenAJ
      et al.A prospective randomized trial comparing stenting with off-pump coronary surgery for high-grade stenosis in the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery: three-year follow-up.J Am Coll Cardiol2002401955-60pmid:12475455
      Drenth DJ, Veeger NJ, Winter JB, Grandjean JG, Mariani MA, van Boven AJ, et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing stenting with off-pump coronary surgery for high-grade stenosis in the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery: three-year follow-up. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:1955-60. [PMID: 12475455]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    91. 91.
      1. DrenthDJ,
      2. VeegerNJ,
      3. GrandjeanJG,
      4. MarianiMA,
      5. van BovenAJ,
      6. BoonstraPW
      Isolated high-grade lesion of the proximal LAD: a stent or off-pump LIMA?Eur J Cardiothorac Surg200425567-71pmid:15037273
      Drenth DJ, Veeger NJ, Grandjean JG, Mariani MA, van Boven AJ, Boonstra PW. Isolated high-grade lesion of the proximal LAD: a stent or off-pump LIMA? Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2004;25:567-71. [PMID: 15037273]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    92. 92.
      1. DrenthDJ,
      2. VeegerNJ,
      3. MiddelB,
      4. ZijlstraF,
      5. BoonstraPW
      Comparison of late (four years) functional health status between percutaneous transluminal angioplasty intervention and off-pump left internal mammary artery bypass grafting for isolated high-grade narrowing of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery.Am J Cardiol2004941414-7pmid:15566914
      Drenth DJ, Veeger NJ, Middel B, Zijlstra F, Boonstra PW. Comparison of late (four years) functional health status between percutaneous transluminal angioplasty intervention and off-pump left internal mammary artery bypass grafting for isolated high-grade narrowing of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery. Am J Cardiol. 2004;94:1414-7. [PMID: 15566914]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    93. 93.
      1. DrenthDJ,
      2. WinterJB,
      3. VeegerNJ,
      4. MonninkSH,
      5. van BovenAJ,
      6. GrandjeanJG
      et al.Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with stenting in isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery: six months' angiographic and clinical follow-up of a prospective randomized study.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg2002124130-5pmid:12091818
      Drenth DJ, Winter JB, Veeger NJ, Monnink SH, van Boven AJ, Grandjean JG, et al. Minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting versus percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with stenting in isolated high-grade stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery: six months' angiographic and clinical follow-up of a prospective randomized study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2002;124:130-5. [PMID: 12091818]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    94. 94.
      1. GoyJJ,
      2. EeckhoutE,
      3. BurnandB,
      4. VogtP,
      5. StaufferJC,
      6. HurniM
      et al.Coronary angioplasty versus left internal mammary artery grafting for isolated proximal left anterior descending artery stenosis.Lancet19943431449-53pmid:7911175
      Goy JJ, Eeckhout E, Burnand B, Vogt P, Stauffer JC, Hurni M, et al. Coronary angioplasty versus left internal mammary artery grafting for isolated proximal left anterior descending artery stenosis. Lancet. 1994;343:1449-53. [PMID: 7911175]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    95. 95.
      1. GoyJJ,
      2. EeckhoutE,
      3. MoretC,
      4. BurnandB,
      5. VogtP,
      6. StaufferJC
      et al.Five-year outcome in patients with isolated proximal left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis treated by angioplasty or left internal mammary artery grafting. A prospective trial.Circulation1999993255-9pmid:10385499
      Goy JJ, Eeckhout E, Moret C, Burnand B, Vogt P, Stauffer JC, et al. Five-year outcome in patients with isolated proximal left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis treated by angioplasty or left internal mammary artery grafting. A prospective trial. Circulation. 1999;99:3255-9. [PMID: 10385499]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    96. 96.
      1. DiegelerA,
      2. ThieleH,
      3. FalkV,
      4. HambrechtR,
      5. SpyrantisN,
      6. SickP
      et al.Comparison of stenting with minimally invasive bypass surgery for stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery.N Engl J Med2002347561-6pmid:12192015
      Diegeler A, Thiele H, Falk V, Hambrecht R, Spyrantis N, Sick P, et al. Comparison of stenting with minimally invasive bypass surgery for stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:561-6. [PMID: 12192015]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    97. 97.
      1. DiegelerA,
      2. SpyrantisN,
      3. MatinM,
      4. FalkV,
      5. HambrechtR,
      6. AutschbachR
      et al.The revival of surgical treatment for isolated proximal high grade LAD lesions by minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting.Eur J Cardiothorac Surg200017501-4pmid:10814909
      Diegeler A, Spyrantis N, Matin M, Falk V, Hambrecht R, Autschbach R, et al. The revival of surgical treatment for isolated proximal high grade LAD lesions by minimally invasive coronary artery bypass grafting. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2000;17:501-4. [PMID: 10814909]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    98. 98.
      1. ThieleH,
      2. OettelS,
      3. JacobsS,
      4. HambrechtR,
      5. SickP,
      6. GummertJF
      et al.Comparison of bare-metal stenting with minimally invasive bypass surgery for stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery: a 5-year follow-up.Circulation20051123445-50pmid:16316966
      Thiele H, Oettel S, Jacobs S, Hambrecht R, Sick P, Gummert JF, et al. Comparison of bare-metal stenting with minimally invasive bypass surgery for stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery: a 5-year follow-up. Circulation. 2005;112:3445-50. [PMID: 16316966]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    99. 99.
      1. HuebWA,
      2. BellottiG,
      3. de OliveiraSA,
      4. ArieS,
      5. de AlbuquerqueCP,
      6. JateneAD
      et al.The Medicine, Angioplasty or Surgery Study (MASS): a prospective, randomized trial of medical therapy, balloon angioplasty or bypass surgery for single proximal left anterior descending artery stenoses.J Am Coll Cardiol1995261600-5pmid:7594092
      Hueb WA, Bellotti G, de Oliveira SA, Arie S, de Albuquerque CP, Jatene AD, et al. The Medicine, Angioplasty or Surgery Study (MASS): a prospective, randomized trial of medical therapy, balloon angioplasty or bypass surgery for single proximal left anterior descending artery stenoses. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;26:1600-5. [PMID: 7594092]
      Abstract
    100. 100.
      1. HuebWA,
      2. SoaresPR,
      3. Almeida De OliveiraS,
      4. AriêS,
      5. CardosoRH,
      6. WajsbrotDB
      et al.Five-year follow-op of the medicine, angioplasty, or surgery study (MASS): A prospective, randomized trial of medical therapy, balloon angioplasty, or bypass surgery for single proximal left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis.Circulation1999100II107-13pmid:10567287
      Hueb WA, Soares PR, Almeida De Oliveira S, Ariê S, Cardoso RH, Wajsbrot DB, et al. Five-year follow-op of the medicine, angioplasty, or surgery study (MASS): A prospective, randomized trial of medical therapy, balloon angioplasty, or bypass surgery for single proximal left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis. Circulation. 1999;100:II107-13. [PMID: 10567287]
      Medline
    101. 101.
      1. HuebW,
      2. SoaresPR,
      3. GershBJ,
      4. CésarLA,
      5. LuzPL,
      6. PuigLB
      et al.The medicine, angioplasty, or surgery study (MASS-II): a randomized, controlled clinical trial of three therapeutic strategies for multivessel coronary artery disease: one-year results.J Am Coll Cardiol2004431743-51pmid:15145093
      Hueb W, Soares PR, Gersh BJ, César LA, Luz PL, Puig LB, et al. The medicine, angioplasty, or surgery study (MASS-II): a randomized, controlled clinical trial of three therapeutic strategies for multivessel coronary artery disease: one-year results. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43:1743-51. [PMID: 15145093]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    102. 102.
      1. FavaratoD,
      2. HuebW,
      3. GershBJ,
      4. SoaresPR,
      5. CesarLA,
      6. da LuzPL
      et al.First Year Follow-Up of MASS II StudyRelative cost comparison of treatments for coronary artery disease: the First Year Follow-Up of MASS II Study.Circulation2003108Suppl 1II21-3pmid:12970202
      Favarato D, Hueb W, Gersh BJ, Soares PR, Cesar LA, da Luz PL, et al.; First Year Follow-Up of MASS II Study. Relative cost comparison of treatments for coronary artery disease: the First Year Follow-Up of MASS II Study. Circulation. 2003;108 Suppl 1:II21-3. [PMID: 12970202]
      Medline
    103. 103.
      1. SoaresPR,
      2. HuebWA,
      3. LemosPA,
      4. LopesN,
      5. MartinezEE,
      6. CesarLA
      et al.Coronary revascularization (surgical or percutaneous) decreases mortality after the first year in diabetic subjects but not in nondiabetic subjects with multivessel disease: an analysis from the Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS II).Circulation2006114I420-4pmid:16820611
      Soares PR, Hueb WA, Lemos PA, Lopes N, Martinez EE, Cesar LA, et al. Coronary revascularization (surgical or percutaneous) decreases mortality after the first year in diabetic subjects but not in nondiabetic subjects with multivessel disease: an analysis from the Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS II). Circulation. 2006;114:I420-4. [PMID: 16820611]
      Medline
    104. 104.↵
      1. PohlT,
      2. GiehrlW,
      3. ReichartB,
      4. KupattC,
      5. RaakeP,
      6. PaulS
      et al.Retroinfusion-supported stenting in high-risk patients for percutaneous intervention and bypass surgery: results of the prospective randomized Myoprotect I study.Catheter Cardiovasc Interv200462323-30pmid:15224298
      Pohl T, Giehrl W, Reichart B, Kupatt C, Raake P, Paul S, et al. Retroinfusion-supported stenting in high-risk patients for percutaneous intervention and bypass surgery: results of the prospective randomized Myoprotect I study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2004;62:323-30. [PMID: 15224298]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    105. 105.
      1. EeftingF,
      2. NathoeH,
      3. van DijkD,
      4. JansenE,
      5. LahporJ,
      6. StellaP
      et al.Randomized comparison between stenting and off-pump bypass surgery in patients referred for angioplasty.Circulation20031082870-6pmid:14656913
      Eefting F, Nathoe H, van Dijk D, Jansen E, Lahpor J, Stella P, et al. Randomized comparison between stenting and off-pump bypass surgery in patients referred for angioplasty. Circulation. 2003;108:2870-6. [PMID: 14656913]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    106. 106.
      1. NathoeHM,
      2. Van DijkD,
      3. JansenEW,
      4. BorstC,
      5. GrobbeeDE,
      6. De JaegerePP
      Off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery compared with stent implantation and on-pump bypass surgery: Clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness at one year.Neth Heart J200513259-68
      Nathoe HM, Van Dijk D, Jansen EW, Borst C, Grobbee DE, De Jaegere PP. Off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery compared with stent implantation and on-pump bypass surgery: Clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness at one year. Neth Heart J. 2005;13:259-68.
    107. 107.
      1. van DijkD,
      2. NierichAP,
      3. EeftingFD,
      4. BuskensE,
      5. NathoeHM,
      6. JansenEW
      et al.The Octopus Study: rationale and design of two randomized trials on medical effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of bypass surgery on the beating heart.Control Clin Trials200021595-609pmid:11146152
      van Dijk D, Nierich AP, Eefting FD, Buskens E, Nathoe HM, Jansen EW, et al. The Octopus Study: rationale and design of two randomized trials on medical effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of bypass surgery on the beating heart. Control Clin Trials. 2000;21:595-609. [PMID: 11146152]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    108. 108.
      1. CisowskiM,
      2. DrzewieckiJ,
      3. Drzewiecka-GerberA,
      4. JaklikA,
      5. KruczakW,
      6. SzczeklikM
      et al.Primary stenting versus MIDCAB: preliminary report-comparison of two methods of revascularization in single left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis.Ann Thorac Surg200274S1334-9pmid:12400812
      Cisowski M, Drzewiecki J, Drzewiecka-Gerber A, Jaklik A, Kruczak W, Szczeklik M, et al. Primary stenting versus MIDCAB: preliminary report-comparison of two methods of revascularization in single left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002;74:S1334-9. [PMID: 12400812]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    109. 109.
      Cisowski M, Drzewiecka-Gerber A, Ulczok R, Abu Samra R, Drzewiecki J, Guzy M, et al. Primary direct stenting versus endoscopic atraumatic coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with proximal stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery—a prospective, randomised study. Kardiol Pol. 2004;61:253-61; discussion 262-4. [PMID: 15531937]
    110. 110.↵
      1. HendersonRA,
      2. PocockSJ,
      3. SharpSJ,
      4. NanchahalK,
      5. SculpherMJ,
      6. BuxtonMJ
      et al.Long-term results of RITA-1 trial: clinical and cost comparisons of coronary angioplasty and coronary-artery bypass grafting. Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina.Lancet19983521419-25pmid:9807988
      Henderson RA, Pocock SJ, Sharp SJ, Nanchahal K, Sculpher MJ, Buxton MJ, et al. Long-term results of RITA-1 trial: clinical and cost comparisons of coronary angioplasty and coronary-artery bypass grafting. Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina. Lancet. 1998;352:1419-25. [PMID: 9807988]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    111. 111.
      Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial.Lancet1993341573-80pmid:8094826
      Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial. Lancet. 1993;341:573-80. [PMID: 8094826]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    112. 112.
      1. HamptonJR
      RITA.Semin Interv Cardiol19994169-77pmid:10738349
      Hampton JR. RITA. Semin Interv Cardiol. 1999;4:169-77. [PMID: 10738349]
      Medline
    113. 113.
      1. HendersonRA
      The Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) Trial protocol: a long term study of coronary angioplasty and coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with angina.Br Heart J198962411-4pmid:2486557
      Henderson RA. The Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) Trial protocol: a long term study of coronary angioplasty and coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with angina. Br Heart J. 1989;62:411-4. [PMID: 2486557]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    114. 114.
      1. PocockSJ,
      2. HendersonRA,
      3. SeedP,
      4. TreasureT,
      5. HamptonJR
      Quality of life, employment status, and anginal symptoms after coronary angioplasty or bypass surgery. 3-year follow-up in the Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) Trial.Circulation199694135-42pmid:8674171
      Pocock SJ, Henderson RA, Seed P, Treasure T, Hampton JR. Quality of life, employment status, and anginal symptoms after coronary angioplasty or bypass surgery. 3-year follow-up in the Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) Trial. Circulation. 1996;94:135-42. [PMID: 8674171]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    115. 115.
      1. SculpherMJ,
      2. SeedP,
      3. HendersonRA,
      4. BuxtonMJ,
      5. PocockSJ,
      6. ParkerJ
      et al.Health service costs of coronary angioplasty and coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial.Lancet1994344927-30pmid:7934351
      Sculpher MJ, Seed P, Henderson RA, Buxton MJ, Pocock SJ, Parker J, et al. Health service costs of coronary angioplasty and coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial. Lancet. 1994;344:927-30. [PMID: 7934351]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    116. 116.↵
      1. HongSJ,
      2. LimDS,
      3. SeoHS,
      4. KimYH,
      5. ShimWJ,
      6. ParkCG
      et al.Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation vs. minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) in patients with left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis.Catheter Cardiovasc Interv20056475-81pmid:15619278
      Hong SJ, Lim DS, Seo HS, Kim YH, Shim WJ, Park CG, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation vs. minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) in patients with left anterior descending coronary artery stenosis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005;64:75-81. [PMID: 15619278]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    117. 117.↵
      1. KimJW,
      2. LimDS,
      3. SunK,
      4. ShimWJ,
      5. RhoYM
      Stenting or MIDCAB using ministernotomy for revascularization of proximal left anterior descending artery?Int J Cardiol200599437-41pmid:15771925
      Kim JW, Lim DS, Sun K, Shim WJ, Rho YM. Stenting or MIDCAB using ministernotomy for revascularization of proximal left anterior descending artery? Int J Cardiol. 2005;99:437-41. [PMID: 15771925]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    118. 118.
      1. GoyJJ,
      2. KaufmannU,
      3. Goy-EggenbergerD,
      4. GarachemaniA,
      5. HurniM,
      6. CarrelT
      et al.A prospective randomized trial comparing stenting to internal mammary artery grafting for proximal, isolated de novo left anterior coronary artery stenosis: the SIMA trial. Stenting vs Internal Mammary Artery.Mayo Clin Proc2000751116-23pmid:11075740
      Goy JJ, Kaufmann U, Goy-Eggenberger D, Garachemani A, Hurni M, Carrel T, et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing stenting to internal mammary artery grafting for proximal, isolated de novo left anterior coronary artery stenosis: the SIMA trial. Stenting vs Internal Mammary Artery. Mayo Clin Proc. 2000;75:1116-23. [PMID: 11075740]
      Abstract
    119. 119.↵
      SoS InvestigatorsCoronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (the Stent or Surgery trial): a randomised controlled trial.Lancet2002360965-70pmid:12383664
      SoS Investigators. Coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (the Stent or Surgery trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2002;360:965-70. [PMID: 12383664]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    120. 120.
      1. StablesRH
      Design of the ‘Stent or Surgery’ trial (SoS): a randomized controlled trial to compare coronary artery bypass grafting with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and primary stent implantation in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease.Semin Interv Cardiol19994201-7pmid:10738353
      Stables RH. Design of the ‘Stent or Surgery’ trial (SoS): a randomized controlled trial to compare coronary artery bypass grafting with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and primary stent implantation in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease. Semin Interv Cardiol. 1999;4:201-7. [PMID: 10738353]
      Medline
    121. 121.
      1. WährborgP,
      2. BoothJE,
      3. ClaytonT,
      4. NugaraF,
      5. PepperJ,
      6. WeintraubWS
      et al.SoS Neuropsychology Substudy InvestigatorsNeuropsychological outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting: results from the Stent or Surgery (SoS) Trial.Circulation20041103411-7pmid:15557380
      Währborg P, Booth JE, Clayton T, Nugara F, Pepper J, Weintraub WS, et al.; SoS Neuropsychology Substudy Investigators. Neuropsychological outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting: results from the Stent or Surgery (SoS) Trial. Circulation. 2004;110:3411-7. [PMID: 15557380]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    122. 122.
      1. WeintraubWS,
      2. MahoneyEM,
      3. ZhangZ,
      4. ChuH,
      5. HuttonJ,
      6. BuxtonM
      et al.One year comparison of costs of coronary surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in the stent or surgery trial.Heart200490782-8pmid:15201249
      Weintraub WS, Mahoney EM, Zhang Z, Chu H, Hutton J, Buxton M, et al. One year comparison of costs of coronary surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in the stent or surgery trial. Heart. 2004;90:782-8. [PMID: 15201249]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    123. 123.
      1. ZhangZ,
      2. MahoneyEM,
      3. StablesRH,
      4. BoothJ,
      5. NugaraF,
      6. SpertusJA
      et al.Disease-specific health status after stent-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass surgery: one-year results from the Stent or Surgery trial.Circulation20031081694-700pmid:12975252
      Zhang Z, Mahoney EM, Stables RH, Booth J, Nugara F, Spertus JA, et al. Disease-specific health status after stent-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass surgery: one-year results from the Stent or Surgery trial. Circulation. 2003;108:1694-700. [PMID: 12975252]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    124. 124.
      1. ZhangZ,
      2. SpertusJA,
      3. MahoneyEM,
      4. BoothJ,
      5. NugaraF,
      6. StablesRH
      et al.The impact of acute coronary syndrome on clinical, economic, and cardiac-specific health status after coronary artery bypass surgery versus stent-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention: 1-year results from the stent or surgery (SoS) trial.Am Heart J2005150175-81pmid:16084166
      Zhang Z, Spertus JA, Mahoney EM, Booth J, Nugara F, Stables RH, et al. The impact of acute coronary syndrome on clinical, economic, and cardiac-specific health status after coronary artery bypass surgery versus stent-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention: 1-year results from the stent or surgery (SoS) trial. Am Heart J. 2005;150:175-81. [PMID: 16084166]
      CrossRefMedline
    125. 125.
      1. ZhangZ,
      2. WeintraubWS,
      3. MahoneyEM,
      4. SpertusJA,
      5. BoothJ,
      6. NugaraF
      et al.Relative benefit of coronary artery bypass grafting versus stent-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention for angina pectoris and multivessel coronary disease in women versus men (one-year results from the Stent or Surgery trial).Am J Cardiol200493404-9pmid:14969611
      Zhang Z, Weintraub WS, Mahoney EM, Spertus JA, Booth J, Nugara F, et al. Relative benefit of coronary artery bypass grafting versus stent-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention for angina pectoris and multivessel coronary disease in women versus men (one-year results from the Stent or Surgery trial). Am J Cardiol. 2004;93:404-9. [PMID: 14969611]
      CrossRefMedline
    126. 126.
      1. CarriéD,
      2. ElbazM,
      3. PuelJ,
      4. FourcadeJ,
      5. KarounyE,
      6. FournialG
      et al.Five-year outcome after coronary angioplasty versus bypass surgery in multivessel coronary artery disease: results from the French Monocentric Study.Circulation199796II-1-6pmid:9386066
      Carrié D, Elbaz M, Puel J, Fourcade J, Karouny E, Fournial G, et al. Five-year outcome after coronary angioplasty versus bypass surgery in multivessel coronary artery disease: results from the French Monocentric Study. Circulation. 1997;96:II-1-6. [PMID: 9386066]
      Medline
    127. 127.↵
      1. MercadoN,
      2. WijnsW,
      3. SerruysPW,
      4. SigwartU,
      5. FlatherMD,
      6. StablesRH
      et al.One-year outcomes of coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with multiple stenting for multisystem disease: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized clinical trials.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg2005130512-9pmid:16077421
      Mercado N, Wijns W, Serruys PW, Sigwart U, Flather MD, Stables RH, et al. One-year outcomes of coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with multiple stenting for multisystem disease: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized clinical trials. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;130:512-9. [PMID: 16077421]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    128. 128.↵
      1. PellJP,
      2. WalshD,
      3. NorrieJ,
      4. BergG,
      5. ColquhounAD,
      6. DavidsonK
      et al.Outcomes following coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in the stent era: a prospective study of all 9890 consecutive patients operated on in Scotland over a two year period.Heart200185662-6pmid:11359748
      Pell JP, Walsh D, Norrie J, Berg G, Colquhoun AD, Davidson K, et al. Outcomes following coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in the stent era: a prospective study of all 9890 consecutive patients operated on in Scotland over a two year period. Heart. 2001;85:662-6. [PMID: 11359748]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    129. 129.↵
      1. MalenkaDJ,
      2. LeavittBJ,
      3. HearneMJ,
      4. RobbJF,
      5. BaribeauYR,
      6. RyanTJ
      et al.Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study GroupComparing long-term survival of patients with multivessel coronary disease after CABG or PCI: analysis of BARI-like patients in northern New England.Circulation2005112I371-6pmid:16159849
      Malenka DJ, Leavitt BJ, Hearne MJ, Robb JF, Baribeau YR, Ryan TJ, et al.; Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. Comparing long-term survival of patients with multivessel coronary disease after CABG or PCI: analysis of BARI-like patients in northern New England. Circulation. 2005;112:I371-6. [PMID: 16159849]
      MedlineWeb of Science
    130. 130.↵
      1. JonesRH,
      2. KeslerK,
      3. PhillipsHR, 3rd,
      4. MarkDB,
      5. SmithPK,
      6. NelsonCL
      et al.Long-term survival benefits of coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease.J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg19961111013-25pmid:8622299
      Jones RH, Kesler K, Phillips HR 3rd, Mark DB, Smith PK, Nelson CL, et al. Long-term survival benefits of coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 1996;111:1013-25. [PMID: 8622299]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    131. 131.↵
      1. DzavikV,
      2. GhaliWA,
      3. NorrisC,
      4. MitchellLB,
      5. KoshalA,
      6. SaundersLD
      et al.Alberta Provincial Project for Outcome Assessment in Coronary Heart Disease (APPROACH) InvestigatorsLong-term survival in 11, 661 patients with multivessel coronary artery disease in the era of stenting: a report from the Alberta Provincial Project for Outcome Assessment in Coronary Heart Disease (APPROACH) Investigators.Am Heart J2001142119-26pmid:11431667
      Dzavik V, Ghali WA, Norris C, Mitchell LB, Koshal A, Saunders LD, et al.; Alberta Provincial Project for Outcome Assessment in Coronary Heart Disease (APPROACH) Investigators. Long-term survival in 11, 661 patients with multivessel coronary artery disease in the era of stenting: a report from the Alberta Provincial Project for Outcome Assessment in Coronary Heart Disease (APPROACH) Investigators. Am Heart J. 2001;142:119-26. [PMID: 11431667].
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science
    132. 132.↵
      1. HannanEL,
      2. RaczMJ,
      3. McCallisterBD,
      4. RyanTJ,
      5. AraniDT,
      6. IsomOW
      et al.A comparison of three-year survival after coronary artery bypass graft surgery and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty.J Am Coll Cardiol19993363-72pmid:9935010
      Hannan EL, Racz MJ, McCallister BD, Ryan TJ, Arani DT, Isom OW, et al. A comparison of three-year survival after coronary artery bypass graft surgery and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1999;33:63-72. [PMID: 9935010]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    133. 133.↵
      1. HannanEL,
      2. RaczMJ,
      3. WalfordG,
      4. JonesRH,
      5. RyanTJ,
      6. BennettE
      et al.Long-term outcomes of coronary-artery bypass grafting versus stent implantation.N Engl J Med20053522174-83pmid:15917382
      Hannan EL, Racz MJ, Walford G, Jones RH, Ryan TJ, Bennett E, et al. Long-term outcomes of coronary-artery bypass grafting versus stent implantation. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:2174-83. [PMID: 15917382]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    134. 134.↵
      Ferguson TB Jr, Hammill BG, Peterson ED, DeLong ER, Grover FL; STS National Database Committee. A decade of change—risk profiles and outcomes for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting procedures, 1990-1999: a report from the STS National Database Committee and the Duke Clinical Research Institute. Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Ann Thorac Surg. 2002;73:480-9; discussion 489-90. [PMID: 11845863]
    135. 135.↵
      1. SedrakyanA,
      2. WuAW,
      3. ParasharA,
      4. BassEB,
      5. TreasureT
      Off-pump surgery is associated with reduced occurrence of stroke and other morbidity as compared with traditional coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis of systematically reviewed trials.Stroke2006372759-69pmid:17008617
      Sedrakyan A, Wu AW, Parashar A, Bass EB, Treasure T. Off-pump surgery is associated with reduced occurrence of stroke and other morbidity as compared with traditional coronary artery bypass grafting: a meta-analysis of systematically reviewed trials. Stroke. 2006;37:2759-69. [PMID: 17008617]
      FREE Full Text
    136. 136.↵
      1. BrenerSJ,
      2. LytleBW,
      3. CasserlyIP,
      4. EllisSG,
      5. TopolEJ,
      6. LauerMS
      Predictors of revascularization method and long-term outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention or repeat coronary bypass surgery in patients with multivessel coronary disease and previous coronary bypass surgery.Eur Heart J200627413-8pmid:16272211
      Brener SJ, Lytle BW, Casserly IP, Ellis SG, Topol EJ, Lauer MS. Predictors of revascularization method and long-term outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention or repeat coronary bypass surgery in patients with multivessel coronary disease and previous coronary bypass surgery. Eur Heart J. 2006;27:413-8. [PMID: 16272211]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    137. 137.↵
      Smith PK, Califf RM, Tuttle RH, Shaw LK, Lee KL, Delong ER, et al. Selection of surgical or percutaneous coronary intervention provides differential longevity benefit. Ann Thorac Surg. 2006;82:1420-8; discussion 1428-9. [PMID: 16996946]
    138. 138.↵
      1. BarsnessGW,
      2. PetersonED,
      3. OhmanEM,
      4. NelsonCL,
      5. DeLongER,
      6. RevesJG
      et al.Relationship between diabetes mellitus and long-term survival after coronary bypass and angioplasty.Circulation1997962551-6pmid:9355893
      Barsness GW, Peterson ED, Ohman EM, Nelson CL, DeLong ER, Reves JG, et al. Relationship between diabetes mellitus and long-term survival after coronary bypass and angioplasty. Circulation. 1997;96:2551-6. [PMID: 9355893]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    139. 139.↵
      1. FeitF,
      2. BrooksMM,
      3. SopkoG,
      4. KellerNM,
      5. RosenA,
      6. KroneR
      et al.Long-term clinical outcome in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation Registry: comparison with the randomized trial. BARI Investigators.Circulation20001012795-802pmid:10859284
      Feit F, Brooks MM, Sopko G, Keller NM, Rosen A, Krone R, et al. Long-term clinical outcome in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation Registry: comparison with the randomized trial. BARI Investigators. Circulation. 2000;101:2795-802. [PMID: 10859284]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    140. 140.↵
      1. WeintraubWS,
      2. SteinB,
      3. KosinskiA,
      4. DouglasJS, Jr,
      5. GhazzalZM,
      6. JonesEL
      et al.Outcome of coronary bypass surgery versus coronary angioplasty in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.J Am Coll Cardiol19983110-9pmid:9426011
      Weintraub WS, Stein B, Kosinski A, Douglas JS Jr, Ghazzal ZM, Jones EL, et al. Outcome of coronary bypass surgery versus coronary angioplasty in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;31:10-9. [PMID: 9426011]
      Abstract/FREE Full Text
    141. 141.
      1. KapurA,
      2. MalikIS,
      3. BaggerJP,
      4. AndersonJR,
      5. KoonerJS,
      6. ThomasM
      et al.The Coronary Artery Revascularisation in Diabetes (CARDia) trial: background, aims, and design.Am Heart J200514913-9pmid:15660030
      Kapur A, Malik IS, Bagger JP, Anderson JR, Kooner JS, Thomas M, et al. The Coronary Artery Revascularisation in Diabetes (CARDia) trial: background, aims, and design. Am Heart J. 2005;149:13-9. [PMID: 15660030]
      CrossRefMedlineWeb of Science

    Responses to this article

    • Question of Data Exclusion
      • Daniel W Carlson
      Ann Intern Med published online October 26, 2009
    « Previous | Next Article »Table of Contents

    This Article

    1. Ann Intern Med November 20, 2007 vol. 147 no. 10 703-716
    1. AbstractFREE
    2. Figures
    3. » Full Text
    4. Full Text (PDF)
    5. CME Course
    6. Audio Summary

    Navigate This Article

    Current Issue

    1. November 3, 2009, 151 (9)
    1. Alert me to current issues