Bayesian Methods Affirm the Use of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention to Improve Survival in Patients With Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease
- 4 June 2013
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Circulation
- Vol. 127 (22), 2177-2185
- https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.112.000646
Abstract
Background—: Several randomized clinical trials support the use of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease. Studies suggesting the equivalence of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with CABG for this indication indirectly support the 2011 American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Class IIa recommendation for PCI to improve survival in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease. We tested whether bayesian approaches uphold the new recommendation. Methods and Results—: We performed a bayesian cross-design and network meta-analysis of 12 studies (4 randomized clinical trials and 8 observational studies) comparing CABG with PCI (n=4574 patients) and of 7 studies (2 randomized clinical trials and 5 observational studies) comparing CABG with medical therapy (n=3224 patients). The odds ratios of 1-year mortality after PCI compared with CABG using bayesian cross-design meta-analysis were not different among randomized clinical trials (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% bayesian credible interval, 0.67–1.43), matched cohort studies (odds ratio, 1.10; 95% bayesian credible interval, 0.76–1.73), and other types of cohort studies (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58–1.35). A network meta-analysis suggested that medical therapy is associated with higher 1-year mortality than the use of PCI for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease (odds ratio, 3.22; 95% bayesian credible interval, 1.96–5.30). Conclusions—: Bayesian methods support the current guidelines, which were based on traditional statistical methods and have proposed that PCI, like CABG, improves survival for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease compared with medical therapy. An integrated approach using both direct and indirect evidence may yield new insights to enhance the translation of clinical trial data into practice.Keywords
This publication has 31 references indexed in Scilit:
- 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary InterventionJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2011
- Randomized Comparison of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Unprotected Left Main Stem StenosisJournal of the American College of Cardiology, 2011
- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention versus Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting for Severe Coronary Artery DiseaseNew England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- Coronary angioplasty in drug eluting stent era for the treatment of unprotected left main stenosis compared to coronary artery bypass graftingAnnals of Medicine, 2008
- Comparison of Percutaneous Versus Surgical Revascularization of Severe Unprotected Left Main Coronary Stenosis in Matched PatientsThe American Journal of Cardiology, 2007
- Comparison of Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Surgery for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery DiseaseThe American Journal of Cardiology, 2007
- Comparison Between Coronary Angioplasty and Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for the Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis (the Bologna Registry)The American Journal of Cardiology, 2006
- Bayesian MethodsPublished by Wiley ,2002
- Effect of coronary artery bypass graft surgery on survival: overview of 10-year results from randomised trials by the Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Trialists CollaborationThe Lancet, 1994
- Effect of coronary bypass surgery on survival patterns in subsets of patients with left main coronary artery diseaseThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1981