Meta-Analysis of Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Unprotected Left Main Coronary Narrowing

Abstract

Patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease are increasingly treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES); however, the benefits of DES compared with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in ULMCA remain controversial. This meta-analysis evaluated the effects of PCI with DES compared with CABG for the treatment of ULMCA stenosis. Databases were searched through November 30, 2016. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DES with PCI versus CABG for ULMCA stenosis were identified. We calculated summary odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs with the random-effects model. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as a composite of death from any cause, stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI). The analysis included 4,612 patients from 5 RCTs. Compared with CABG, patients assigned to PCI had a similar rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.43), all-cause mortality (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.35), cardiovascular death (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.45), stroke (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.76), and MI (OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.47). The risk of any repeat revascularization was significantly greater in the PCI group than that in the CABG group (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.53 to 2.24). In conclusion, our meta-analysis of RCTs suggest that PCI with DES results in comparable mortality, stroke, and MI compared with CABG for revascularization of ULMCA stenosis, with PCI associated with higher rates of repeat revascularization.