Yusuf S, Zucker D, Peduzzi P, Fisher L D, Takaro T, Kennedy J W, Davis K, Killip T, Passamani E, Norris R
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Bethesda, Maryland.
Lancet. 1994 Aug 27;344(8922):563-70. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(94)91963-1.
We carried out a systematic overview using individual patient data from the seven randomised trials that have compared a strategy of initial coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery with one of initial medical therapy to assess the effects on mortality in patients with stable coronary heart disease (stable angina not severe enough to necessitate surgery on grounds of symptoms alone, or myocardial infarction). 1324 patients were assigned CABG surgery and 1325 medical management between 1972 and 1984. The proportion of patients in the medical treatment group who had undergone CABG surgery was 25% at 5 years, 33% at 7 years, and 41% at 10 years: 93.7% of patients assigned to the surgery group underwent CABG surgery. The CABG group had significantly lower mortality than the medical treatment group at 5 years (10.2 vs 15.8%; odds ratio 0.61 [95% CI 0.48-0.77], p = 0.0001), 7 years (15.8 vs 21.7%; 0.68 [0.56-0.83], p < 0.001), and 10 years (26.4 vs 30.5%; 0.83 [0.70-0.98]; p = 0.03). The risk reduction was greater in patients with left main artery disease than in those with disease in three vessels or one or two vessels (odds ratios at 5 years 0.32, 0.58, and 0.77, respectively). Although relative risk reductions in subgroups defined by other baseline characteristics were similar, the absolute benefits of CABG surgery were most pronounced in patients in the highest risk categories. This effect was most evident when several prognostically important clinical and angiographic risk factors were integrated to stratify patients by risk levels and the extension of survival at 10 years was examined (change in survival -1.1 [SE 3.1] months in low-risk group, 5.0 [4.2] months in moderate-risk group, and 8.8 [5.4] months in high-risk group; p for trend < 0.003). A strategy of initial CABG surgery is associated with lower mortality than one of medical management with delayed surgery if necessary, especially in high-risk and medium-risk patients with stable coronary heart disease. In low-risk patients, the limited data show a non-significant trend towards greater mortality with CABG.
我们利用七项随机试验的个体患者数据进行了一项系统综述,这些试验比较了初始冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)策略与初始药物治疗策略,以评估对稳定型冠心病(稳定型心绞痛严重程度不足以仅因症状就需要手术,或心肌梗死)患者死亡率的影响。1972年至1984年间,1324例患者被分配接受CABG手术,1325例接受药物治疗。药物治疗组中接受CABG手术的患者比例在5年时为25%,7年时为33%,10年时为41%:分配到手术组的患者中有93.7%接受了CABG手术。CABG组在5年时的死亡率显著低于药物治疗组(10.2%对15.8%;优势比0.61 [95%可信区间0.48 - 0.77],p = 0.0001),7年时(15.8%对21.7%;0.68 [0.56 - 0.83],p < 0.001),以及10年时(26.4%对30.5%;0.83 [0.70 - 0.98];p = 0.03)。左主干病变患者的风险降低幅度大于三支血管病变或单支或两支血管病变患者(5年时的优势比分别为0.32、0.58和0.77)。尽管按其他基线特征定义的亚组中的相对风险降低相似,但CABG手术的绝对益处在最高风险类别的患者中最为明显。当整合几个对预后重要的临床和血管造影风险因素以按风险水平对患者进行分层并检查10年生存率的延长情况时,这种效应最为明显(低风险组的生存变化为-1.1 [标准误3.1]个月,中风险组为5.0 [4.2]个月,高风险组为8.8 [5.4]个月;趋势p < 0.003)。初始CABG手术策略与必要时延迟手术的药物治疗策略相比,死亡率更低,尤其是在稳定型冠心病的高风险和中风险患者中。在低风险患者中,有限的数据显示CABG手术导致死亡率增加的趋势不显著。