Abstract
Whether percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic total occlusion (CTO-PCI) in diabetic patients offers more benefits compared with initial medical therapy (CTO-MT) is unclear. In this study, diabetic patients with one CTO (clinical manifestations: stable angina or silent ischemia) were enrolled. Consecutively, enrolled patients (n = 1605) were assigned to different groups: CTO-PCI (1044 [65.0%]) and initial CTO-MT (561 [35%]). After a median follow-up of 44 months, CTO-PCI tended to be superior to initial CTO-MT in major adverse cardiovascular events (adjusted hazard-ratio [aHR]: .81, 95% conference-interval: .65–1.02) and significantly superior in cardiac death (aHR: .58 [.39–.87]) and all-cause death (aHR: .678[.473–.970]). Such superiority mainly attributed to a successful CTO-PCI. CTO-PCI tended to be performed in patients with younger age, good collaterals, left anterior descending branch CTO, and right coronary artery CTO. While, those with left circumflex CTO and severe clinical/angiographic situations were more likely to be assigned to initial CTO-MT. However, none of these variables influenced the benefits of CTO-PCI. Thus, we concluded that for diabetic patients with stable CTO, CTO-PCI (mainly successful CTO-PCI) offered patients survival benefits over initial CTO-MT. These benefits were consistent regardless of clinical/angiographic characteristics.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
