CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
English

科学研究

科研文章

荐读文献

Randomized study on simple versus complex stenting of coronary artery bifurcation lesions: the Nordic bifurcation study Optical Coherence Tomography Predictors for Recurrent Restenosis After Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon Angioplasty for Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis The European bifurcation club Left Main Coronary Stent study: a randomized comparison of stepwise provisional vs. systematic dual stenting strategies (EBC MAIN) In-Hospital Outcomes of Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Patients With Prior Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Comparison of the safety and efficacy of two types of drug-eluting balloons (RESTORE DEB and SeQuent® Please) in the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (RESTORE ISR China) Multicentre, randomized comparison of two-stent and provisional stenting techniques in patients with complex coronary bifurcation lesions: the DEFINITION II trial Comparison of new-generation drug-eluting stents versus drug-coated balloon for in-stent restenosis: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials Angiographic quantitative flow ratio-guided coronary intervention (FAVOR III China): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial Sustainable Antirestenosis Effect With a Low-Dose Drug-Coated Balloon: The ILLUMENATE European Randomized Clinical Trial 2-Year Results Long-term clinical outcomes after treatment of stent restenosis with two drug-coated balloons

Original ResearchVolume 74, Issue 16, October 2019

JOURNAL:JACC Article Link

Individualizing Revascularization Strategy for Diabetic Patients With Multivessel Coronary Disease

M Qintar, KH Humphries, JE Park et al.

ABSTRACT


BACKGROUND - In patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD), the FREEDOM (Future Revascularization Evaluation in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: Optimal Management of Multivessel Disease) trial demonstrated that, on average, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was superior to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for major acute cardiovascular events (MACE) and angina reduction. Nonetheless, multivessel PCI remains a common revascularization strategy in the real world.

 

OBJECTIVES - To translate the results of FREEDOM to individual patients in clinical practice, risk models of the heterogeneity of treatment benefit were built.

 

METHODS - Using patient-level data from 1,900 FREEDOM patients, the authors developed models to predict 5-year MACE (all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke) and 1-year angina after CABG and PCI using baseline covariates and treatment interactions. Parsimonious models were created to support clinical use. The models were internally validated using bootstrap resampling, and the MACE model was externally validated in a large real-world registry.

 

RESULTS - The 5-year MACE occurred in 346 (18.2%) patients, and 310 (16.3%) had angina at 1 year. The MACE model included 8 variables and treatment interactions with smoking status (c = 0.67). External validation in stable CAD (c = 0.65) and ACS (c = 0.68) demonstrated comparable performance. The 6-variable angina model included a treatment interaction with SYNTAX score (c = 0.67). PCI was never superior to CABG, and CABG was superior to PCI for MACE in 54.5% of patients and in 100% of patients with history of smoking.

 

CONCLUSIONS - To help disseminate the results of FREEDOM, the authors created a personalized risk prediction tool for patients with diabetes and multivessel CAD that could be used in shared decision-making for CABG versus PCI by estimating each patients personal outcomes with both treatments.