Loading…

A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Medical Therapy in Stable Angina Pectoris

Abstract There continues to remain uncertainty regarding the effect of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs medical therapy in patients with stable angina. We therefore performed a systematic review and study-level meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of patients with stable angina c...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Canadian journal of cardiology 2013-04, Vol.29 (4), p.472-482
Main Authors: Thomas, Sabu, MD, FRCPC, FACC, Gokhale, Rohit, MD, Boden, William E., MD, FACC, FAHA, Devereaux, P.J., MD, PhD, FRCPC
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract There continues to remain uncertainty regarding the effect of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs medical therapy in patients with stable angina. We therefore performed a systematic review and study-level meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of patients with stable angina comparing PCI vs medical therapy for each of the following individual outcomes: all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and angina relief. We used 8 strategies to identify eligible trials including bibliographic database searches of MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry until November 2011. Two independent reviewers undertook decisions about study eligibility and data abstraction. Data were pooled using a random effects model. Ten prospective randomized controlled trials fulfilled our eligibility criteria and they included a total of 6752 patients. We did not detect differences between PCI vs medical therapy for all-cause mortality (663 events; relative risk [RR], 0.97 [confidence interval (CI), 0.84-1.12]; I2 = 0%), CV mortality (214 events; RR, 0.91 [CI, 0.70-1.17]; I2 = 0%), MI (472 events; RR, 1.09 [CI, 0.92-1.29]; I2 = 0%), or angina relief at the end of follow-up (2016 events; RR, 1.10 [CI, 0.97-1.26]; I2 =85%). PCI was not associated with reductions in all-cause or CV mortality, MI, or angina relief. Considering the cost implication and the lack of clear clinical benefit, these findings continue to support existing clinical practice guidelines that medical therapy be considered the most appropriate initial clinical management for patients with stable angina.
ISSN:0828-282X
1916-7075
DOI:10.1016/j.cjca.2012.07.010