CBS 2019
CBSMD教育中心
中 文

Other Relevant Articles

Abstract

Recommended Article

Developing and Testing a Personalized, Evidence-Based, Shared Decision-Making Tool for Stent Selection in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using a Pre-Post Study Design Clinical Implications of Periprocedural Myocardial Injury in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Chronic Total Occlusion: Role of Antegrade and Retrograde Crossing Techniques Global, regional, and national age-sex specific mortality for 264 causes of death, 1980–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016 A Randomized Trial Comparing the NeoVas Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold and Metallic Everolimus-Eluting Stents Catheterization Laboratory Considerations During the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic: From the ACC’s Interventional Council and SCAI Use of Risk Assessment Tools to Guide Decision-Making in the Primary Prevention of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease A Special Report From the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiolog New AHA/ACC/HRS Guidance on Sudden Cardiac Death Prevention Obesity, Diabetes, and Acute Coronary Syndrome: Differences Between Asians and Whites

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.