Survival following coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in anatomic subsets in which coronary artery bypass surgery improves survival compared with medical therapy Results from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI)

AbstractOBJECTIVESWe sought to compare survival after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) in high-risk anatomic subsets.BACKGROUNDCompared with medical therapy, CABG decreases mortality in patients with three-vessel disease and two-vessel disease involving the proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD), particularly if left ventricular (LV) dysfunction is present. How survival after PTCA and CABG compares in these high-risk anatomic subsets is unknown.METHODSIn the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI), 1,829 patients with multivessel disease were randomized to an initial strategy of PTCA or CABG between 1988 and 1991. Stents and IIb/IIIa inhibitors were not utilized. Since patients in BARI with diabetes mellitus had greater survival with CABG, separate analyses of patients without diabetes were performed.RESULTSSeven-year survival among patients with three-vessel disease undergoing PTCA and CABG (n = 754) was 79% versus 84% (p = 0.06), respectively, and 85% versus 87% (p = 0.36) when only non-diabetics (n = 592) were analyzed. In patients with three-vessel disease and reduced LV function (ejection fraction <50%), seven-year survival was 70% versus 74% (p = 0.6) in all PTCA and CABG patients (n = 176), and 82% versus 73% (p = 0.29) among non-diabetic patients (n = 124). Seven-year survival was 87% versus 84% (p = 0.9) in all PTCA and CABG patients (including diabetics) with two-vessel disease involving the proximal LAD (n = 352), and 78% versus 71% (p = 0.7) in patients with two-vessel disease involving the proximal LAD with reduced LV function (n = 72).CONCLUSIONIn high–risk anatomic subsets in which survival is prolonged by CABG versus medical therapy, revascularization by PTCA and CABG yielded equivalent survival over seven years

Native coronary disease progression exceeds failed revascularization as cause of angina after five years in the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation (BARI)

ObjectivesCoronary angiograms obtained five years following revascularization were examined to assess the extent of compromise in myocardial perfusion due to failure of revascularization versus progression of native disease.BackgroundThe Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) randomized revascularization candidates between bypass surgery and angioplasty. Entry and five-year angiograms from 407 of 519 (78%) patients at four centers were analyzed.MethodsAnalysis of the distribution of coronary vessels and stenoses provided a measure of myocardial jeopardy that correlates with presence of angina. The extent to which initial benefits of revascularization were undone by failed revascularization versus native disease progression was assessed.ResultsMyocardial jeopardy fell following initial revascularization, from 60% to 17% for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-treated patients compared with 60% to 7% for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery patients (p < 0.001), rebounding at five years to 25% for PCI and 20% for surgery patients (p = 0.01). Correspondingly, angina prevalence was higher at five years in PCI-treated patients than in surgery-treated patients (28% vs. 18%; p = 0.03). However, myocardial jeopardy at five years, and not initial treatment (PCI vs. surgery), was independently associated with late angina. Increased myocardial jeopardy from entry to five-year angiogram occurred in 42% of PCI-treated patients and 51% of CABG-treated patients (p = 0.06). Among the increases in myocardial jeopardy, two-thirds occurred in previously untreated arteries.ConclusionsNative coronary disease progression occurred more often than failed revascularization in both PCI- and CABG-treated patients as a cause of jeopardized myocardium and angina recurrence. These results support intensive postrevascularization risk-factor modification