Patients with diabetes have poorer outcomes with coronary artery disease (CAD) and pose a unique clinical population for revascularization. We performed a pairwise meta-analysis of randomized trials (RCTs) and propensity-matched observational studies (PMS) to compare the clinical outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with diabetes.
Methods:
A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify RCT and PMS studies comparing CABG with PCI in patients with diabetes with concurrent CAD. Studies were pooled using the random-effects model to perform a pairwise meta-analysis. Primary outcomes included long-term all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), and repeat revascularization. Meta-regression was used to explore the effects of baseline risk factors on primary outcomes with moderate to high heterogeneity.
Results:
A total of 18 RCTs and 9 PMS with 28,846 patients were included. PCI was associated with increased long-term all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR] = 1.34, P < 0.001), cardiac mortality (RR = 1.52, P < 0.001), MI (RR = 1.51, P = 0.009), MACCE (RR = 1.65, P < 0.001), and repeat revascularization (RR = 2.48, P < 0.001) compared with CABG. There was no difference in long-term stroke between the 2 groups (RR = 0.95, P = 0.82). At meta-regression, a greater proportion of female patients in studies was associated with a decreased protective benefit for CABG for long-term all-cause mortality but an increased protective benefit for long-term MI and repeat revascularization.
Conclusions:
Revascularization of patients with diabetes using CABG is associated with significantly reduced long-term mortality, MI, MACCE, and repeat revascularizations. Future studies exploring the influence of gender on revascularization outcomes are necessary to elucidate the ideal treatment modality in patients with diabetes.
Writing Committee Members, LawtonJSTamis-HollandJE, et al. 2021 ACC/AHA/SCAI guideline for coronary artery revascularization: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol2022; 79: 197–215.
4.
MorriconeLRanucciMDentiS, et al. Diabetes and complications after cardiac surgery: comparison with a non-diabetic population. Acta Diabetol1999; 36: 77–84.
5.
AbizaidACostaMACentemeroM, et al. Clinical and economic impact of diabetes mellitus on percutaneous and surgical treatment of multivessel coronary disease patients: insights from the Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study (ARTS) trial. Circulation2001; 104: 533–538.
6.
KappeteinAPHeadSJMoriceMC, et al. Treatment of complex coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes: 5-year results comparing outcomes of bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention in the SYNTAX trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg2013; 43: 1006–1013.
7.
KurbaanASBowkerTJIlsleyCD, et al. Difference in the mortality of the CABRI diabetic and nondiabetic populations and its relation to coronary artery disease and the revascularization mode. Am J Cardiol2001; 87: 947–950.
8.
SerruysPWOngATLvan HerwerdenLA, et al. Five-year outcomes after coronary stenting versus bypass surgery for the treatment of multivessel disease: the final analysis of the Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study (ARTS) randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol2005; 46: 575–581.
9.
MilojevicMSerruysPWSabikJF, et al. Bypass surgery or stenting for left main coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes. J Am Coll Cardiol2019; 73: 1616–1628.
10.
KamaleshMSharpTGTangXC, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass surgery in United States Veterans with diabetes. J Am Coll Cardiol2013; 61: 808–816.
11.
FarkouhMEDomanskiMSleeperLA, et al. Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367: 2375–2384.
12.
NagendranJBozsoSJNorrisCM, et al. Coronary artery bypass surgery improves outcomes in patients with diabetes and left ventricular dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol2018; 71: 819–827.
13.
TamDYDharmaCRochaR, et al. Long-term survival after surgical or percutaneous revascularization in patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary disease. J Am Coll Cardiol2020; 76: 1153–1164.
14.
StroupDFBerlinJAMortonSC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA2000; 283: 2008–2012.
15.
SterneJACSavovićJPageMJ, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ2019; 366: l4898.
VermaSFarkouhMEYanagawaB, et al. Comparison of coronary artery bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol2013; 1: 317–328.
19.
NussmeierNA. A review of risk factors for adverse neurologic outcome after cardiac surgery. J Extra Corpor Technol2002; 34: 4–10.
20.
RamESternikLKlempfnerR, et al. Type 2 diabetes mellitus increases the mortality risk after acute coronary syndrome treated with coronary artery bypass surgery. Cardiovasc Diabetol2020; 19: 86.
21.
KheraRSecemskyEAWangY, et al. Revascularization practices and outcomes in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who presented with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock in the US, 2009-2018. JAMA Intern Med2020; 180: 1317–1327.
22.
CooperWAO’BrienSMThouraniVH, et al. Impact of renal dysfunction on outcomes of coronary artery bypass surgery. Circulation2006; 113: 1063–1070.
23.
GualanoSKGurmHSShareD, et al. Temporal trends in the use of drug-eluting stents for approved and off-label indications: a longitudinal analysis of a large multicenter percutaneous coronary intervention registry. Clin Cardiol2010; 33: 111–116.
24.
HigginsJPTAltmanDGGøtzschePC, et al. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ2011; 343: d5928.
25.
BARI Investigators. The final 10-year follow-up results from the BARI randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol2007; 49: 1600–1606.
26.
BanningAPWestabySMoriceMC, et al. Diabetic and nondiabetic patients with left main and/or 3-vessel coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol2010; 55: 1067–1075.
27.
Ben-GalYMohrRFeitF, et al. Surgical versus percutaneous coronary revascularization for multivessel disease in diabetic patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome: analysis from the Acute Catheterization and Early Intervention Triage Strategy trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv2015; 8: e002032.
28.
SedlisSPMorrisonDALorinJD, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary bypass graft surgery for diabetic patients with unstable angina and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: outcome of diabetic patients in the AWESOME randomized trial and registry. J Am Coll Cardiol2002; 40: 1555–1566.
29.
The BARI Investigators. Influence of diabetes on 5-year mortality and morbidity in a randomized trial comparing CABG and PTCA in patients with multivessel disease: the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). Circulation1997; 96: 1761–1769.
30.
ParkSJAhnJMKimYH, et al. Trial of everolimus-eluting stents or bypass surgery for coronary disease. N Engl J Med2015; 372: 1204–1212.
31.
KapurAHallRJMalikIS, et al. Randomized comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention with coronary artery bypass grafting in diabetic patients: 1-year results of the CARDia (Coronary Artery Revascularization in Diabetes) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol2010; 55: 432–440.
32.
KingSBKosinskiASGuytonRA, et al. Eight-year mortality in the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST). J Am Coll Cardiol2000; 35: 1116–1121.
33.
RodriguezAEBaldiJFernández PereiraC, et al. Five-year follow-up of the Argentine randomized trial of coronary angioplasty with stenting versus coronary bypass surgery in patients with multiple vessel disease (ERACI II). J Am Coll Cardiol2005; 46: 582–588.
34.
SoaresPRHuebWALemosPA, et al. Coronary revascularization (surgical or percutaneous) decreases mortality after the first year in diabetic subjects but not in nondiabetic subjects with multivessel disease: an analysis from the Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study (MASS II). Circulation2006; 114(1 suppl): I420–I424.
35.
LimaEGHuebWGarciaRMR, et al. Impact of diabetes on 10-year outcomes of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease in the Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study II (MASS II) trial. Am Heart J2013; 166: 250–257.
36.
HolmNRMäkikallioTLindsayMM, et al. Percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass grafting in the treatment of unprotected left main stenosis: updated 5-year outcomes from the randomised, non-inferiority NOBLE trial. Lancet2020; 395: 191–199.
37.
AhnJMRohJHKimYH, et al. Randomized trial of stents versus bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease: 5-year outcomes of the PRECOMBAT Study. J Am Coll Cardiol2015; 65: 2198–2206.
38.
HendersonRAPocockSJSharpSJ, et al. Long-term results of RITA-1 trial: clinical and cost comparisons of coronary angioplasty and coronary-artery bypass grafting. Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina. Lancet1998; 352: 1419–1425.
39.
BoothJClaytonTPepperJ, et al. Randomized, controlled trial of coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: six-year follow-up from the Stent or Surgery Trial (SoS). Circulation2008; 118: 381–388.
40.
ThuijsDJFMKappeteinAPSerruysPW, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial. Lancet2019; 394: 1325–1334.
41.
BiancoVKilicAMulukutlaSR, et al. Coronary artery bypass grafting vs percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg2021; 33: 368–377.
42.
Domínguez-FrancoAJJiménez-NavarroMFHernández-GarcíaJM, et al. Comparison of medium-term outcomes obtained with drug-eluting stents and coronary artery bypass grafts in an unselected population of diabetic patients with multivessel coronary disease. Propensity score analysis. Rev Esp Cardiol2009; 62: 491–500.
43.
KurlanskyPHerbertMPrinceS, et al. Improved long-term survival for diabetic patients with surgical versus interventional revascularization. Ann Thorac Surg2015; 99: 1298–1305.
44.
BangaloreSGuoYSamadashviliZ, et al. Everolimus eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery for patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel disease. Circ Cardiovasc Interv2015; 8: e002626.
45.
LiYDongRHuaK, et al. Outcomes of coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients aged 18-45 years with diabetes mellitus. Chin Med J (Engl)2017; 130: 2906–2915.
46.
LeeYJHongSJKimBK, et al. Long-term outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention relative to bypass surgery in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease according to clinical presentation. Coron Artery Dis2020; 31: 174–183.
47.
ContiniGANicoliniFFortunaD, et al. Five-year outcomes of surgical or percutaneous myocardial revascularization in diabetic patients. Int J Cardiol2013; 168: 1028–1033.
48.
FlahertyJDDavidsonCJ. Diabetes and coronary revascularization. JAMA2005; 293: 1501–1508.
49.
GaoFZhouYJShenH, et al. Meta-analysis of percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery in patients with diabetes and left main and/or multivessel coronary artery disease. Acta Diabetol2013; 50: 765–773.
50.
GreasonKLSchaffHV. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) for patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease: identifying patients who would benefit with CABG and understanding the potential mechanisms involved. Coron Artery Dis2010; 21: 402–406.
51.
AntunesPEde OliveiraJFAntunesMJ. Coronary surgery in patients with diabetes mellitus: a risk-adjusted study on early outcome. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg2008; 34: 370–375.
52.
ZhaiCCongHHouK, et al. Clinical outcome comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention and bypass surgery in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Diabetol Metab Syndr2019; 11: 110.
53.
ZhengZXuBZhangH, et al. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery and percutaneous coronary interventions in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease. JACC: Cardiovasc Interv2016; 9: 1102–1111.
54.
RamanathanKAbelJGParkJE, et al. Surgical versus percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with diabetes and acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol2017; 70: 2995–3006.
55.
GaudinoMDi FrancoAAlexanderJH, et al. Sex differences in outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting: a pooled analysis of individual patient data. Eur Heart J2022; 43: 18–28.
56.
KurlanskyPHerbertMPrinceS, et al. Coronary bypass versus percutaneous intervention: sex matters. The impact of gender on long-term outcomes of coronary revascularization. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg2017; 51: 554–561.
57.
FanariZWeissSAZhangW, et al. Meta-analysis of three randomized controlled trials comparing coronary artery bypass grafting with percutaneous coronary intervention using drug-eluting stenting in patients with diabetes. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg2014; 19: 1002–1007.
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.
