Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Chronic Total Occlusion
Hristo Kirov,Johannes Fischer,Tulio Caldonazo,Panagiotis Tasoudis,Angelique Runkel,Giovanni Jr. Soletti,Gianmarco Cancelli,Michele Dell'Aquila,Murat Mukharyamov,Torsten Doenst
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0044-1787014
2024-05-19
The Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeon
Abstract:Objectives Mechanisms of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) differ as CABG provides surgical collateralization and may prolong life by preventing future myocardial infarctions (MIs). However, evidence for CABG in patients with chronic total occlusion (CTO) has not been fully elucidated and the impact of PCI is discussed controversially. Methods We performed a meta-analysis of studies comparing outcomes in patients with/without multivessel disease undergoing CABG or PCI for CTO. The primary outcome was long-term all-cause mortality (≥5 years). Secondary outcomes were MIs, repeat revascularization, cardiac mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, and stroke, as well as short-term mortality (30 days/in-hospital) and stroke. A pooled Kaplan–Meier survival curve after reconstruction analysis was generated. Random-effects models were used. Results Six studies totaling 12,504 patients were included. In the pooled Kaplan–Meier analysis, PCI showed a significantly higher risk of death in the follow-up compared with CABG (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.88–2.38, p < 0.01). During the observation period, PCI was also associated with higher rates of MI (odds ratio [OR]: 2.86, 95% CI: 1.82–4.48, p < 0.01) and more repeat revascularization (OR: 4.88, 95% CI: 1.99–11.91, p = 0.0005). The other outcomes did not show significant differences. Conclusion CABG is associated with superior survival to PCI over time in patients with CTO who are eligible for both PCI and CABG. This survival advantage is associated with fewer events of MI and repeat revascularization. This study was accepted for presentation at the DGTHG annual meeting 2024 in Hamburg, Germany. Its abstract was ranked among the top 25 submissions. The data underlying this article are available in the article and in its online supplementary material. H.K., J.F., and T.C. designed the study, as well as coordinated and performed the major steps of the work regarding literature review, study selection, data management, and manuscript writing. Due to the fact that a meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data is significantly effort demanding, the authors will share the first authorship. P.T. helped extensively with the statistical approach (especially with the Cox regression model and the proportional hazards assumption tests). A.R., G.S., and G.C. qualified the studies according to the risk of bias, checked the data abstraction, built the tables, and organized the results. M.D. and M.M. analyzed the preliminary data and were involved in the international project registration. T.D. was directly involved with the project supervision, manuscript review, and editing and was also consulted for study accuracy verification together with H.K. in cases of conflict. All the authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript. * These authors contributed equally. Received: 28 December 2023 Accepted: 29 April 2024 Article published online: 17 May 2024 © 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag KG Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
surgery,cardiac & cardiovascular systems,respiratory system