Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent versus coronary artery bypass grafting: A meta-analysis of patients with left main coronary artery disease

Abstract

BackgroundThe relative efficacy and safety of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES), in comparison to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) remains controversial. MethodsWe performed a meta-analysis of randomised studies comparing patients with LMCAD treated with PCI with DES versus those treated with CABG, with respect to clinical outcomes at 1, 3 and 5years. A secondary meta-analysis was performed according to low (<32), or high (≥33) SYNTAX score. ResultsFive studies comprising 4595 patients were included. There was no significant difference in all-cause death at all time points or when stratified with respect to SYNTAX score. The need for repeat revascularization was significantly higher with PCI at all time-points, and regardless of SYNTAX score. There was significant association between need for repeat revascularization with PCI and diabetics (p=0.04). At 5years, non-fatal MI was higher with PCI owing to increased non-procedural events (OR 3.00; CI 1.45–6.21; p=0.003). CABG showed higher rate of stroke at 1year (OR 0.21; CI 0.07–0.63; p=0.005). There was no difference in non-fatal MI or stroke at other time points, nor according to SYNTAX score. ConclusionsPCI with DES or CABG are equivalent strategies for LMCAD up to 5years with respect to death, regardless of SYNTAX score. PCI increases the rate of non-procedural MI at 5years. CABG avoids the need for repeat revascularization, especially in diabetics, but this benefit is offset by higher rate of stroke in the first year of follow up.