|
|
||||||||
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 2006;29:486-491
© 2006 Elsevier Science NL
Department of Thoracic Surgery, ErasmusMC, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, The Netherlands
Received 6 October 2005; accepted 20 January 2006.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +31 10 4635412; fax: +31 10 4633993. (Email: a.kappetein{at}erasmusmc.nl).
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Key Words: Coronary artery bypasses grafting Percutaneous coronary intervention Coronary revascularization
| 1. Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Due to these recent improvements in both PCI and CABG, determining the best revascularization strategy for 3VD and LM disease patients may not be straightforward.
SYNTAX (Synergy between PCI with TAXUS drug-eluting stent and Cardiac Surgery) is a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial designed to compare revascularization with either CABG or PCI with TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stents for the treatment of de novo 3VD or left main disease (isolated or in association with one-, two-, or three-vessel disease). The primary objective of the SYNTAX trial is to compare the 12-month major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCE) rates including death, stroke, documented nonfatal myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization by either percutaneous intervention or bypass surgery.
The SYNTAX trial has an all comers design to address the criticism of previous trials that did not capture the real world of clinical practice. The trial includes a randomized arm of 1500 patients: 750 assigned to PCI with a TAXUS drug-eluting stent versus 750 to coronary artery bypass graft surgery. In addition to the randomized arm, there are two nested registries, one that includes patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery who are deemed ineligible for PCI, and the other includes patients treated with PCI who are deemed ineligible for coronary artery bypass graft surgery.
As a requirement for participation in SYNTAX, all interested investigators were asked to provide anonymous information on each LM or three-vessel disease procedure performed at their site during a 3-month period. These data were used to make decisions for site entry based on case volume, case complexity, and technique. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe the findings from this unique roll in database reflecting current surgical and percutaneous revascularization patterns in Europe and North America.
| 2. Material and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 3. Statistical analysis |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 4. Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5. Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
With technical advances, more challenging anatomical subsets become amenable to treatment with PCI. Patients with three-vessel disease and left main coronary artery disease are being treated with increasing frequency with PCI, due to findings that in selected patients who could have either procedure, both survival and survival free of myocardial infarction are equivalent between PCI and CABG [1,2]. The introduction of drug-eluting stents may also have a major impact on the need for repeat revascularization in diabetic patients, and the difference between PCI and coronary surgery may also narrow considerably in this higher risk patient population [9].
Despite the increasing age and concomitant increased co-morbidity of patients presenting for CABG, clinical outcomes have continued to improve [8]. This trend was evident from the 5-year results of the ARTS study [2] with a lower mortality seen in the CABG arm compared with older studies. The off-pump coronary bypass technique, developed to minimize the invasiveness of CABG, has demonstrated a reduction in morbidity and mortality in several large, retrospective studies when compared with CABG [10,11]. Conversely, aside from improvements in atrial fibrillation, randomized, controlled trials did not show the same statistically significant reductions in short-term mortality or morbidity that were demonstrated by observational studies [12]. These discrepancies might be due to differing patient-selection and study methodologies. Larger randomized trials focusing on long-term outcomes are necessary to definitively address this issue [13].
Despite the growing evidence in the literature that arterial-only grafts in CABG achieve significantly better long-term survival than the combined use of arterial and vein grafts [7,14], the 12% rate of total arterial grafting in this study was low. In comparison with PCI, the strength of coronary surgery may ultimately lie in better long-term outcomes, and therefore, the use of arterial grafts should be further advocated.
In this current run-in phase, patients with multivessel disease are frequently treated with PCI. Of interest is the fact that PCI is performed 1.5 times more often in these selected centers in Europe as compared with North America. When isolated three-vessel disease patients are considered, the frequency of PCI performance is 1.8 times higher in Europe compared to North American centers. PCI for unprotected left main coronary artery disease showed the most striking difference with three times as many procedures in Europe. There was also a considerable variability within Europe with the United Kingdom using CABG for three-vessel disease almost twice as often as France. There was less variability between North American and European centers for left main coronary artery disease. However, there were noticeable differences between European countries, with 60% CABG revascularization for left main disease in the Netherlands compared to 87% CABG revascularization in Belgium. This regional variability may reflect differences in reimbursement policies, local practice guidelines, or more conservative approaches to novel technologies due to a lack of evidence-based medicine.
Earlier data from randomized trials indicated an advantage of CABG over PCI for left main and three-vessel coronary artery disease, and surgery remained the standard of care for these patients. However, as the data from this run-in phase show, the introduction of drug-eluting stents has changed practice patterns, and many patients are now being treated with PCI. Nevertheless, drug-eluting stents may also be associated with complications, particularly stent thrombosis [1517], and it has yet to be proven in a randomized trial that the hard end points of death, repeat revascularization, cerebrovascular accidents and myocardial infarction are the same with both revascularization techniques. The SYNTAX trial will provide a solid dataset to assess the various issues in left main and multivessel disease and will set new guidelines for our patients in the future.
| Appendix A |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Dr P. Kolh (Liege, Belgium): As you know, we are participating in the trial and happy to do so. I would like to ask you a couple of questions. First, do you have any idea why PCI is less used in the US as compared to Europe? I understand why there could be regional differences within Europe but I dont see why there would be a between-continent difference.
The second is that most of us should be surprised by the rather low use of full arterial revascularization. Do you think that because of this trial and because of the long-term importance of arterial revascularization, the surgeons would change their practice during the ongoing trial and, furthermore, are we going to encourage them to do so?
Dr Kappetein : Very important questions you raise. I think that an important reason why there is a difference in PCI rate between Europe and North America is that because PCI treatment for three-vessel disease and left main is not evidence-based medicine yet, the interventional cardiologists in the United States are more reluctant to perform PCI for this indication, because if something goes wrong they might be eligible for a lawsuit. If you look at the difference between the United Kingdom and the rest of Europe, it might be due to the reason that drug-eluting stents in the UK are not reimbursed. It is not that the interventional cardiologists are not so skilful as in the rest of Europe.
And coming back to your question about arterial grafting, yes, indeed we think it is very important. We have seen a lot of papers in the literature that arterial grafting is important, especially in the younger patient population. So we encourage the surgeons who participate in the trial to perform as much arterial grafting as they can, hopefully without increasing the risk for the patient. So if they are used to perform arterial grafting we encourage them to do so.
Whether we will be able to answer the question whether complete arterial grafting is better, I have my doubts, because, as you know, cardiac surgeons look at the long-term outcome while interventional cardiologists look at a much shorter term. The primary end point of this trial will be at one year and the secondary end point at five years and then it will stop. Therefore, the follow-up might be too short.
Dr R. Mohr (Tel Aviv, Israel): What is the meaning of all-comer study and how do you make sure that it is an all-comer?
Dr Kappetein : Like I said before, in the former trials only about 5% of the patients were included in the studies, so we wanted to have this all-comer design to be sure that we capture the real practice. Therefore, we asked the centers, to capture all patients that enter their hospital, when they start the trial. When they think that the patient is eligible for PCI and coronary bypass surgery, the patient will be randomized. When they think that coronary bypass surgery is not possible because the patient has a lot of co-morbidities, the patient will be entered into a database, what we call the PCI registry, and when the interventional cardiologist says, well, I cannot do a PCI on this patient because he has two chronic total occlusions and he has a very bad left main stem, then the patient will be sent to surgery and he will be entered in a CABG registry. In this way the surgeon and the cardiologist are forced to sit down to discuss the patient. So the surgeon and the cardiologist together decide whether the patient is randomizable or whether he has to go into one of the registries.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
Centers that participated in the roll in phase of the SYNTAX trial are as follows:
Univ. Klinik für Herzchirurgie Landeskliniken, Salzburg, Austria; Allgemeines Krankenhaus AKH, Vienna, Austria; Onze-Lieve-Vrouw Ziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; AZ Middelheim Antwerp, Belgium; UZ gent, Gent, Belgium; CHU Sart Tilman, Lìege, Belgium; Hôpital de la Citadelle, Lìege, Belgium; University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada; Vancouver General Hospital, Vancouver, Canada; St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, Canada; Sunnybrook & Women's College Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada; St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada; Faculty Hospital Kralovske, Prague, Czech Republic; Prague University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic; Skejby Sygehus, Aarhus, Denmark; Rigshospitalet Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark; Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland; Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland; CHU Côté de Nacre, Caen, France; Institut Hospitalier Jacques Cartier, Massy, France; CHU Rouen, Rouen, France; Clinique St Hilaire, Rouen, France; CCN St. Denis, St. Denis, France; CHU Toulouse, Toulouse, France; Clinique Pasteur, Toulouse, France; Clinique St. Augustin, Bordeaux, France; Hospital Henri Mondor, Creteil, France; Universitätsklinikum Rudolf Virchow, Berlin, Germany; Ludwigs-University Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany; Universitätsklinikum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; Christian Albrechts University, Kiel, Germany; Herzzentrum Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany; Medizinische Universität Lübeck, Lubeck, Germany; Klinikum Grosshadern, Munich, Germany; Krankenhaus der Barmherziger Bruder, Trier, Germany; Herz- und Diabetes zentrum Nordrhein Westfalen, Bad Oeyenhausen, Germany; National Health Institute, Budapest, Hungary; University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary; Heart Institute Medical School of University PECS, Pécs, Hungary; Ospedali Riuniti di Bergamo, Bergamo, Italy; Spedali civili di Brescia, Brescia, Italy; G. Pasquinucci Hospital, Massa, Italy; Fondazione San Raffaele de Monte, Milano, Italy; Ospedale di Mirano, Mirano, Italy; Instituto di Ricovero e Cura, Pavia, Italy; Azienda Ospedaliera Pisana, Pisa, Italy; Universita Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy; Instituto Clinico Humanitas, Rosano, Italy; AZIENDA TREVISO, Treviso, Italy; P Stradins University Hospital, Riga, Latvia; Amphia Ziekenhuis Klokkenberg, Breda, Netherlands; Catharina Ziekenhuis, Eindhoven, Netherlands; AZ Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands; Sint Antonius Ziekenhuis, Nieuwegein, Netherlands; Erasmus MC, Thoraxcenter, Rotterdam, Netherlands; Ziekenhuis De Weezenlanden, Zwolle, Netherlands; Rikshospitalet, Oslo, Norway; SPSK Nr 7 Silesian School of Medecine, Katowice, Poland; Jagellionian University, John Paul II Hospital, Krakow, Poland; National Institute of Cardiology, Warsaw, Poland; Central Hospital Int Affairs, Warsaw, Poland; Hospital de Santa Marta, Lisboa, Portugal; H. de Alicante, Alicante, Spain; Hospital Clínico I Provencial, Barcelona, Spain; Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain; Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain; Hospital Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain; Sahlgrenska Universitetssjukhus, Göteborg, Sweden; Universitetssjukhuset Lund, Lund, Sweden; Karolinska, Stockholm, Sweden; Akademiska Sjukhuset, Uppsala, Sweden; Hôpital Cantonal Universitaire, Service Cardiologie, Geneva, Switzerland; University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland; Western Infirmary, Glasgow, UK; Glenfield General Hospital, Leicester, UK; King's College Hospital, London, UK; London Chest, London, UK; St Thomas and Guys, London, UK; James Cook, Middlesbrough, UK; John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK; Southampton University Hospital, Southampton, UK; Royal Sussex County hospital, Brighton, UK; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; Birmingham Heart Clinic, Birmingham, AL, USA; Abbott Northwestern, Minneapolis, MN, USA; Mercy General Hospital, Sacramento, CA, USA; Florida Hospital Orlando, Orlando, FL, USA; Cannon Cardiac & Vascualr Research Ctr, Petoskey, MI, USA; Maine Medical Center, Portland, ME, USA; Ocala Heart Institute, Ocala, FL, USA; St. Luke's Medical Center, Milwaukee, WI, USA; Medical City Hospital, Dallas, TX, USA; Wakemed Wake Heart Research, Raleigh, NC, USA; Evanston Hospital, Evanston, IL, USA; Oklahoma Heart Hospital, Oklahoma, OK, USA; Sentara Norfollk, Norfolk, VA, USA; Moses Cone Memorial,Greensboro, NC, USA; St. Joseph's Hospital, Syracuse, NY, USA; Tufts New England, Boston, MA, USA; Spectrum Health Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA; Northwestern Memorial Hosp, Chicago, IL, USA; University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA; Washington Hospital Centre, Washington DC, USA; Scripps Clinic, La Jolla, CA, USA.
| Footnotes |
|---|
Presented at the joint 19th Annual Meeting of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery and the 13th Annual Meeting of the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons, Barcelona, Spain, September 2528, 2005. | References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. Damgaard, J. T. Lund, N. B. Lilleor, M. J. Perko, K. Sander, B. Dimo, M. B. Jensen, J. K. Madsen, H. Kelbaek, and D. A. Steinbruchel Comparable three months' outcome of total arterial revascularization versus conventional coronary surgery: Copenhagen Arterial Revascularization Randomized Patency and Outcome trial. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg., May 1, 2008; 135(5): 1069 - 1075. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. B. Barner Operative Treatment of Coronary Atherosclerosis Ann. Thorac. Surg., April 1, 2008; 85(4): 1473 - 1482. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. P. Taggart, S. Kaul, W. E. Boden, T. B. Ferguson Jr, R. A. Guyton, M. J. Mack, P. T. Sergeant, R. J. Shemin, P. K. Smith, and S. Yusuf Revascularization for unprotected left main stem coronary artery stenosis stenting or surgery. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., March 4, 2008; 51(9): 885 - 892. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Brinker The left main facts: faced, spun, but alas too few. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., March 4, 2008; 51(9): 893 - 898. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
N. D. Desai Pitfalls Assessing the Role of Drug-Eluting Stents in Multivessel Coronary Disease Ann. Thorac. Surg., January 1, 2008; 85(1): 25 - 27. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. H. Yang, H.-C. Gwon, S. J. Cho, J. Y. Hahn, J.-H. Choi, S. H. Choi, Y. T. Lee, S. H. Lee, K. P. Hong, and J. E. Park Comparison of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting With Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation for the Treatment of Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Ann. Thorac. Surg., January 1, 2008; 85(1): 65 - 70. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Gerber, C. S. Rihal, T. M. Sundt III, J. M. Killian, S. A. Weston, T. M. Therneau, and V. L. Roger Coronary Revascularization in the Community: A Population-Based Study, 1990 to 2004 J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., September 25, 2007; 50(13): 1223 - 1229. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. W. Stone, J. W. Moses, and M. B. Leon Left Main Drug-Eluting Stents: Natural Progression or a Bridge Too Far? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., August 7, 2007; 50(6): 498 - 500. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. H Wong, S. Wan, and M. J Underwood Myocardial Revascularization: Surgery or Stenting? Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann, June 1, 2007; 15(3): 264 - 269. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H.-P. B.-L. Rocca, C. Kaiser, M. Pfisterer, and on behalf of the BASKET Investigators Targeted stent use in clinical practice based on evidence from the BAsel Stent Cost Effectiveness Trial (BASKET) Eur. Heart J., March 2, 2007; 28(6): 719 - 725. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. B. Barner Status of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg., September 1, 2006; 30(3): 419 - 424. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| ANN THORAC SURG | ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN | EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG |
| J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG | ICVTS | ALL CTSNet JOURNALS |