Division of Cardiology and Cardiac Surgery, and Division of Biostatistics, Center for Medical Research and Information, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2012 Aug 1;5(4):467-75. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.112.969915. Epub 2012 Aug 7.
Coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are alternative treatments for complex multivessel or left main disease. However, the relative treatment effects in diabetic and nondiabetic patients remain uncertain.
We performed a pooled analysis of 5775 patients from 3 clinical studies comparing PCI and coronary artery bypass grafting for multivessel or left main disease and compared adverse outcomes (death; a composite outcome of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or stroke; and repeat revascularization) according to the diabetic status. Over a median follow-up of 5.5 years, risk-adjusted mortality after PCI relative to coronary artery bypass grafting was not different in diabetic (hazard ratio [HR], 1.15; 95% CI, 0.88-1.51) and nondiabetic (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.88-1.50) patients. The adjusted risks of the composite outcome of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or stroke were also not different in diabetic (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.79-1.26) and nondiabetic (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.78-1.26) patients. However, PCI was significantly associated with higher risk of repeat revascularization both in diabetic (HR, 3.56; 95% CI, 2.62-4.83) and in nondiabetic (HR, 3.55; 95% CI, 2.61-4.83) patients. Significant interactions were absent between diabetic status and revascularization strategies for death (P=0.27), composite outcome of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or stroke (P=0.97), and repeat revascularization (P=0.08).
For multivessel or left main disease, the long-term risks of mortality and composite serious outcomes were not different between PCI and coronary artery bypass grafting in diabetic and nondiabetic patients, but PCI was associated with higher risk of repeat revascularization. These relative treatment effects were not modified by diabetic status. These results are hypothesis generating and should be addressed in a randomized trial.
对于复杂的多血管或左主干疾病,冠状动脉旁路移植术和经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)是两种可选择的治疗方法。然而,糖尿病和非糖尿病患者的相对治疗效果仍不确定。
我们对 3 项临床研究中的 5775 例患者进行了汇总分析,这些研究比较了多血管或左主干疾病的 PCI 和冠状动脉旁路移植术,根据糖尿病状态比较了不良结局(死亡;死亡、Q 波心肌梗死或卒中的复合结局;以及再次血运重建)。在中位随访 5.5 年期间,与冠状动脉旁路移植术相比,糖尿病患者的 PCI 后风险调整死亡率没有差异(危险比[HR],1.15;95%CI,0.88-1.51),非糖尿病患者的 HR 也没有差异(HR,1.15;95%CI,0.88-1.50)。在糖尿病(HR,1.00;95%CI,0.79-1.26)和非糖尿病(HR,0.99;95%CI,0.78-1.26)患者中,死亡、Q 波心肌梗死或卒中的复合结局的调整风险也没有差异。然而,在糖尿病(HR,3.56;95%CI,2.62-4.83)和非糖尿病(HR,3.55;95%CI,2.61-4.83)患者中,PCI 与再次血运重建的风险显著相关。在死亡(P=0.27)、死亡、Q 波心肌梗死或卒中的复合结局(P=0.97)和再次血运重建(P=0.08)方面,糖尿病状态与血运重建策略之间没有显著的相互作用。
对于多血管或左主干疾病,在糖尿病和非糖尿病患者中,PCI 和冠状动脉旁路移植术的长期死亡率和复合严重结局风险没有差异,但 PCI 与再次血运重建的风险较高相关。这些相对治疗效果不受糖尿病状态的影响。这些结果是假设性的,需要在随机试验中解决。