Article

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Diabetes and Multivessel or Left Main Disease - A Review

Abstract

Coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes is frequently a diffuse process with multivessel involvement and is associated with increased risk for myocardial infarction and death. The role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with diabetes and multivessel disease who require revascularization has been debated and remains uncertain. The debate has been continued mainly because of the question to what degree an increased risk for in-stent restenosis among patients with diabetes contributes to other late adverse outcomes. This article reviews outcomes from early trials of balloon angioplasty versus CABG through later trials of bare-metal stents versus CABG and more recent data with drug-eluting stents as the comparator. Although not all studies have been powered to show statistical significance, the results have been generally consistent with a mortality benefit for CABG versus PCI, despite differential risks for restenosis with the various PCI approaches. The review also considers the impact of mammary artery grafting of the left anterior descending artery and individual case selection on these results, and proposes an algorithm for selection of patients in whom PCI remains a reasonable strategy.

Copyright Statement:

The copyright in this work belongs to Radcliffe Medical Media. Only articles clearly marked with the CC BY-NC logo are published with the Creative Commons by Attribution Licence. The CC BY-NC option was not available for Radcliffe journals before 1 January 2019. Articles marked ‘Open Access’ but not marked ‘CC BY-NC’ are made freely accessible at the time of publication but are subject to standard copyright law regarding reproduction and distribution. Permission is required for reuse of this content.

Abstract

Coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes is frequently a diffuse process with multivessel involvement and is associated with increased risk for myocardial infarction and death. The role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with diabetes and multivessel disease who require revascularization has been debated and remains uncertain. The debate has been continued mainly because of the question to what degree an increased risk for in-stent restenosis among patients with diabetes contributes to other late adverse outcomes. This article reviews outcomes from early trials of balloon angioplasty versus CABG through later trials of bare-metal stents versus CABG and more recent data with drug-eluting stents as the comparator. Although not all studies have been powered to show statistical significance, the results have been generally consistent with a mortality benefit for CABG versus PCI, despite differential risks for restenosis with the various PCI approaches. The review also considers the impact of mammary artery grafting of the left anterior descending artery and individual case selection on these results, and proposes an algorithm for selection of patients in whom PCI remains a reasonable strategy.

To view the full article in PDF format, please click on the icon above.

References

  1. Grundy SM, Benjamin IJ, Burke GL, et al., Diabetes and cardiovascular disease: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association, Circulation, 1999;100:1134–46.
    Crossref | PubMed
  2. Kannel WB, McGee DL, Diabetes and cardiovascular risk factors: the Framingham study, Circulation, 1979;59:8–13.
    Crossref | PubMed
  3. Stamler J, Vaccaro O, Neaton JD, Wentworth D, Diabetes, other risk factors, and 12-yr cardiovascular mortality for men screened in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial, Diabetes Care, 1993;16:434–44.
    Crossref | PubMed
  4. Sarwar N, Gao P, Seshasai SR, et al., Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and risk of vascular disease: a collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies, Lancet, 2010;375:2215–22.
    Crossref | PubMed
  5. Natali A, Vichi S, Landi P, et al., Coronary atherosclerosis in Type II diabetes: angiographic findings and clinical outcome, Diabetologia, 2000;43:632–41.
    Crossref | PubMed
  6. Pajunen P, Taskinen MR, Nieminen MS, Syvanne M, Angiographic severity and extent of coronary artery disease in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus, Am J Cardiol, 2000;86:1080–5.
    Crossref | PubMed
  7. Carrozza JP, Jr., Kuntz RE, Fishman RF, Baim DS, Restenosis after arterial injury caused by coronary stenting in patients with diabetes mellitus, Ann Intern Med, 1993;118:344–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  8. Rozenman Y, Sapoznikov D, Mosseri M, et al., Long-term angiographic follow-up of coronary balloon angioplasty in patients with diabetes mellitus: a clue to the explanation of the results of the BARI study. Balloon Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation, J Am Coll Cardiol, 1997;30:1420–5.
    Crossref | PubMed
  9. Kuntz RE, Importance of considering atherosclerosis progression when choosing a coronary revascularization strategy: the diabetes-percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty dilemma, Circulation, 1999;99:847–51.
    Crossref | PubMed
  10. Barsness GW, Peterson ED, Ohman EM, et al., Relationship between diabetes mellitus and long-term survival after coronary bypass and angioplasty, Circulation, 1997;96:2551–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  11. 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), Circulation, 1997;96:1761–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  12. Frye RL, August P, Brooks MM, et al., A randomized trial of therapies for type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease, N Engl J Med, 2009;360:2503–15.
    Crossref | PubMed
  13. The CABRI Investigators, First-year results of CABRI (Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularisation Investigation). CABRI Trial Participants, Lancet, 1995;346:1179–84.
    Crossref | PubMed
  14. The RITA Investigators, Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial, Lancet, 1993;341:573–80.
    Crossref | PubMed
  15. King SB, 3rd, Lembo NJ, Weintraub WS, et al., A randomized trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST), N Engl J Med, 1994;331:1044–50.
    Crossref | PubMed
  16. The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) Investigators, Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with angioplasty in patients with multivessel disease, N Engl J Med, 1996;335:217–25.
    Crossref | PubMed
  17. Serruys PW, Ong AT, van Herwerden LA, 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 Cardiol, 2005;46:575–81.
    Crossref | PubMed
  18. King SB, 3rd, Kosinski AS, Guyton RA, et al., Eight-year mortality in the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST), J Am Coll Cardiol, 2000;35:1116–21.
    Crossref | PubMed
  19. Kurbaan AS, Bowker TJ, Ilsley CD, 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 Cardiol, 2001;87:947–50; A943.
    Crossref | PubMed
  20. The BARI Investigators, The final 10-year follow-up results from the BARI randomized trial, J Am Coll Cardiol, 2007;49:1600–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  21. Henderson RA, Pocock SJ, Sharp SJ, 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, Lancet, 1998;352:1419–25.
    Crossref | PubMed
  22. Booth J, Clayton T, Pepper J, 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), Circulation, 2008;118:381–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  23. The SoS Investigators, Coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (the Stent or Surgery trial): a randomised controlled trial, Lancet, 2002;360:965–70.
    Crossref | PubMed
  24. Hoffman SN, TenBrook JA, Wolf MP, et al., A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing coronary artery bypass graft with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: one- to eight-year outcomes, J Am Coll Cardiol, 2003;41:1293–1304.
    Crossref | PubMed
  25. Hlatky MA, Boothroyd DB, Bravata DM, et al., Coronary artery bypass surgery compared with percutaneous coronary interventions for multivessel disease: a collaborative analysis of individual patient data from ten randomised trials, Lancet, 2009;373:1190–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  26. Serruys PW, Unger F, Sousa JE, et al., Comparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease, N Engl J Med, 2001;344:1117–24.
    Crossref | PubMed
  27. Onuma Y, Wykrzykowska JJ, Garg S, et al., 5-Year follow-up of coronary revascularization in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: insights from ARTS (arterial revascularization therapy study)-II and ARTS-I trials, JACC Cardiovasc Interv, 2011;4:317–23.
    Crossref | PubMed
  28. Daemen J, Wenaweser P, Tsuchida K, et al., Early and late coronary stent thrombosis of sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in routine clinical practice: data from a large two-institutional cohort study, Lancet, 2007;369:667–78.
    Crossref | PubMed
  29. Räber L, Wohlwend L, Wigger M, et al., Five-year clinical and angiographic outcomes of a randomised comparison of sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents: results of SIRTAX LATE, Circulation, 2011;123:2819–28.
    Crossref | PubMed
  30. Farkouh ME, Dangas G, Leon MB, et al., Design of the Future REvascularization Evaluation in patients with Diabetes mellitus: Optimal management of Multivessel disease (FREEDOM) trial, Am Heart J, 2008;155:215–23.
    Crossref | PubMed
  31. Serruys PW, Ong ATL, Morice MC, et al., Arterial Revascularisation Therapies Study Part II – sirolimus-eluting stents for the treatment of patients with multivessel de novo coronary artery lesions, Eurointervention, 2005;1:147–56.
    PubMed
  32. Kapur A, Hall RJ, Malik IS, 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 Cardiol, 2010;55:432–40.
    Crossref | PubMed
  33. Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, et al., Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease, N Engl J Med, 2009;360:961–72.
    Crossref | PubMed
  34. Mack MJ, Banning AP, Serruys PW, et al., Bypass versus drug-eluting stents at three years in SYNTAX patients with diabetes mellitus or metabolic syndrome, Ann Thorac Surg, 2011;92:2140–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  35. Mark DB, Nelson CL, Califf RM, et al., Continuing evolution of therapy for coronary artery disease, Initial results from the era of coronary angioplasty, Circulation, 1994;89:2015–25.
    Crossref | PubMed
  36. Detre KM, Guo P, Holubkov R, et al., Coronary revascularization in diabetic patients: a comparison of the randomized and observational components of the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI), Circulation, 1999;99(5):633–40.
    Crossref | PubMed