Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of data from the ARTS II, CARDia, ERACI III, and SYNTAX studies and systematic review of observational data

Aims: The aim of this study was to systematically analyse the available data from trials comparing revascularisation by drug-eluting stent (DES) placement versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods and results: We searched PubMed, Medline and several internet sources for randomised controlled trials comparing DES placement to CABG in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. There were no restrictions on journal type or population studied. Prior to data collection we chose to analyse the prospectively performed trials separately from data obtained retrospectively. Four prospective trials were identified which enrolled a total of 3,895 patients: 1,914 in the DES arm and 1,981 patients in the CABG arm. Pooled analysis of data from these four studies showed that in patients treated DES compared to CABG there was a similar risk of the combined endpoints of death, myocardial infarction and stroke (10.2% versus 10.8%, respectively; RR=0.94 [95% CI=0.77-1.116]; p=0.56), but a significantly higher risk of target vessel revascularisation (TVR) (14.6% versus 6.8%, respectively; RR=2.09 [95% CI=1.72-2.55]; <0.001) and, therefore, a significantly higher risk of MACCE (21.2% versus 16.3%, respectively; RR=1.27 [95% CI=1.09-1.48]; p=0.002). Interestingly, when MACCE rates at one year are used for these trials the risk is equivalent between DES and CABG (14.4% versus 12.5%, respectively; RR=1.05 [95% CI=0.70-1.57]; p=0.83). Analysis of observational data revealed similar findings. Conclusions: Overall, PCI with DES placement was safe in patients with multivessel disease compared to CABG, but is associated with a significantly higher risk of TVR.