4.4 Article

Invasive therapy versus conservative therapy for patients with stable coronary artery disease: An updated meta-analysis

期刊

CLINICAL CARDIOLOGY
卷 44, 期 5, 页码 675-682

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/clc.23592

关键词

coronary artery bypass grafting; medical therapy; percutaneous coronary intervention; stable coronary artery disease

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A comprehensive meta-analysis found no survival advantage of an initial invasive strategy over conservative medical therapy in patients with stable coronary artery disease. The study showed no significant difference in all-cause mortality or cardiovascular mortality between invasive and medical arms. Moreover, there were lower rates of major adverse cardiac events in the revascularization arm compared to the conservative arm.
Background Heart disease remains the leading cause of death in the United States. Although there are clear indications for revascularization in patients with acute coronary syndromes, there is debate regarding the benefits of revascularization in stable ischemic heart disease. We sought to perform a comprehensive meta-analysis to assess the role of revascularization compared to conservative medical therapy alone in patients with stable ischemic heart disease. Hypothesis There is no significant difference in all-cause mortality or cardiovascular mortality between invasive and medical arms. Methods We performed a systematic literature search from January 2000 to June 2020. Our literature search yielded seven randomized controlled trials. We analyzed a total of 12 013 patients (6109 in revascularization arm and 5904 in conservative medical therapy arm). Primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (death, myocardial infarction [MI], or stroke), cardiovascular mortality, MI, and stroke. Additional subgroup analysis for all-cause mortality was performed comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bare metal stent versus conservative therapy; and PCI with drug eluting stent versus conservative therapy. Results There was no statistically significant difference in primary outcome of all-cause mortality between either arm (odds ratio [OR] = 0.95; 95% CI [confidence interval], 0.83 to 1.08; p = .84). There were statistically significant lower rates of MACE (death, MI or stroke) in the revascularization arm when compared to conservative arm. Conclusions Our analysis did not show any survival advantage of an initial invasive strategy over conservative medical therapy in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据