Literature DB >> 8090163

A randomized trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST)

S B King1, N J Lembo, W S Weintraub, A S Kosinski, H X Barnhart, M H Kutner, N P Alazraki, R A Guyton, X Q Zhao.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The clinical benefit of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) as compared with coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease has not been established. To determine the outcomes of these treatments in patients referred for the first time for coronary revascularization, we conducted a three-year prospective, randomized trial comparing the two procedures.
METHODS: Revascularization was performed by accepted methods. Follow-up clinical information was collected every six months, and coronary arteriography and thallium stress scanning were performed at one and three years. The primary end point was a composite of death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, and a large ischemic defect identified on thallium scanning at three years. Secondary end points included clinical and angiographic status and the need for additional revascularization procedures. Data were analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle.
RESULTS: Of the 5118 patients screened for the trial, 842 (16.5 percent) were eligible for enrollment, and 392 (7.7 percent) agreed to participate. A total of 194 patients were randomly assigned to the CABG group, and 198 to the PTCA group. The primary end point occurred in 27.3 percent of the CABG group and 28.8 percent of the PTCA group (P = 0.81). Death occurred in 6.2 percent of the CABG group and 7.1 percent of the PTCA group (P = 0.73 by log-rank test). At three years, the proportions of patients in the CABG group who required repeated bypass surgery (1 percent) or angioplasty (13 percent) were significantly lower than the proportions in the PTCA group (22 and 41 percent, respectively; P < 0.001). Angiographic studies at three years showed a greater degree of revascularization in the CABG group. Angina was more frequent in the PTCA group (20 percent) than in the CABG group (12 percent).
CONCLUSIONS: We found that CABG and PTCA did not differ significantly with respect to the occurrence of the composite primary end point. Consequently, the selection of one procedure over the other should be guided by patients' preferences regarding the quality of life and the possible need for subsequent procedures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8090163     DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199410203311602

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  69 in total

Review 1.  Differences in outcome between percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary bypass grafting.

Authors:  J S Alpert
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 2.  Revascularization strategies in patients with diabetes: evolving concepts.

Authors:  J J Brennan; H S Cabin
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2000 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 5.952

3.  Succesful Identification and Management of High-Risk Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 2.300

4.  Is surgery still the preferred option for coronary revascularisation in diabetics with multivessel coronary disease?

Authors:  A Kapur; I S Malik
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 5.994

5.  Outcomes following coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in the stent era: a prospective study of all 9890 consecutive patients operated on in Scotland over a two year period.

Authors:  J P Pell; D Walsh; J Norrie; G Berg; A D Colquhoun; K Davidson; H Eteiba; A Faichney; A Flapan; K J Hogg; R R Jeffrey; K Jennings; J McArthur; P Mankad; K Oldroyd; A C Pell; I R Starkey
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 5.994

6.  Role of myocardial perfusion imaging after coronary revascularization in symptom-free patients: are low-risk patients really low?

Authors:  Dominick Joseph Angiolillo; Alessandro Giordano
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2002 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.952

Review 7.  Indications for percutaneous and surgical revascularisation: how far does the evidence base guide us?

Authors:  P M Schofield
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 8.  Revascularisation in diabetics with multivessel coronary artery disease.

Authors:  K J Beatt; K P Morgan; A Kapur
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 5.994

9.  Propensity analysis of outcome in coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients >75 years old.

Authors:  Bassel S Al-Alao; Haralabos Parissis; Eilis McGovern; Michael Tolan; Vincent K Young
Journal:  Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2012-03-28

Review 10.  Revascularization for left main and multivessel coronary artery disease in the drug-eluting stent era: integration of recent drug-eluting stent trials.

Authors:  Samip Vasaiwala; David O Williams
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.931

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.