PDF herunterladen
Thromb Haemost 2021; 121(01): 008-014
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1715830
Invited Clinical Focus

Lessons Learnt from Recent Trials in Ischemic Heart Disease

John M. Mandrola
1   Department of Cardiology, Baptist Health Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky, United States
,
Sanjay Kaul
2   Department of Cardiology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, United States
,
Andrew Foy
3   Department of Cardiology, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, Pennsylvania, United States
› Institutsangaben
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Four recently published randomized controlled trials have informed the care of patients with stable ischemic heart disease. The purpose of this clinical focus article is to offer a summary and critical appraisal of the recent evidence. We aim to aid clinicians in the translation of the trial evidence to patient care.

Keywords

ischemic heart disease - percutaneous coronary intervention - coronary artery bypass graft - placebo


Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 26. Februar 2020

Angenommen: 15. Juli 2020

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
30. August 2020

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Maron DJ, Hochman JS, O'Brien SM. et al; ISCHEMIA Trial Research Group. International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA) trial: rationale and design. Am Heart J 2018; 201: 124-135
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Frye RL, August P, Brooks MM. et al; BARI 2D Study Group. A randomized trial of therapies for type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 2503-2515
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Boden WE, O'Rourke RA, Teo KK. et al; COURAGE Trial Research Group. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2007; 356 (15) 1503-1516
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Shaw LJ, Weintraub WS, Maron DJ. et al. Baseline stress myocardial perfusion imaging results and outcomes in patients with stable ischemic heart disease randomized to optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention. Am Heart J 2012; 164 (02) 243-250
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Hachamovitch R, Hayes SW, Friedman JD, Cohen I, Berman DS. Comparison of the short-term survival benefit associated with revascularization compared with medical therapy in patients with no prior coronary artery disease undergoing stress myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography. Circulation 2003; 107 (23) 2900-2907
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Murthy VL, Eagle KA. ISCHEMIA: a search for clarity and why we may not find it. Am Heart J 2018; 203: 82-84
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Maron DJ, Hochman JS, Reynolds HR. et al. Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2020; 382: 1395-1407
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Spertus JA, Jones PG, Maron DJ. et al. Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2020; 382: 1408-1419
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bangalore S, Maron DJ, O'Brien SM. et al. Management of coronary disease in patients with advanced kidney disease. N Engl J Med 2020; 382: 1608-1618
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Mancini GBJ, Hartigan PM, Shaw LJ. et al. Predicting outcome in the COURAGE trial (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation): coronary anatomy versus ischemia. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2014; 7 (02) 195-201
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Rajkumar CA, Nijjer SS, Cole GD, Al-Lamee R, Francis DP. ‘Faith Healing’ and ‘Subtraction Anxiety’ in unblinded trials of procedures: lessons from DEFER and FAME-2 for end points in the ISCHEMIA trial. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2018; 11 (03) e004665
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Al-Lamee R, Thompson D, Dehbi H-M. et al; ORBITA investigators. Percutaneous coronary intervention in stable angina (ORBITA): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2018; 391 (10115): 31-40
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Chaitman BR, Skettino SL, Parker JO. et al; MARISA Investigators. Anti-ischemic effects and long-term survival during ranolazine monotherapy in patients with chronic severe angina. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 43 (08) 1375-1382
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Borer JS, Fox K, Jaillon P, Lerebours G. Ivabradine Investigators Group. Antianginal and antiischemic effects of ivabradine, an I(f) inhibitor, in stable angina: a randomized, double-blind, multicentered, placebo-controlled trial. Circulation 2003; 107 (06) 817-823
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Francis DP, Al-Lamee R. Percutaneous coronary intervention for stable angina in ORBITA - authors' reply. Lancet 2018; 392 (10141): 28-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Al-Lamee R, Howard JP, Shun-Shin MJ. et al. Fractional flow reserve and instantaneous wave-free ratio as predictors of the placebo-controlled response to percutaneous coronary intervention in stable single-vessel coronary artery disease. Circulation 2018; 138 (17) 1780-1792
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Al-Lamee RK, Shun-Shin MJ, Howard JP. et al. Dobutamine stress echocardiography ischemia as a predictor of the placebo-controlled efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention in stable coronary artery disease: the stress echocardiography-stratified analysis of ORBITA. Circulation 2019; 140 (24) 1971-1980
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 A Placebo-controlled Trial of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for the Relief of Stable Angina - Full Text View - ClinicalTrials.gov. Available at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03742050 . Accessed August 10, 2020
  • 19 2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients with Stable Ischemic Heart Disease | Circulation 2012;126:e354–e471
  • 20 Stone GW, Sabik JF, Serruys PW. et al; EXCEL Trial Investigators. Everolimus-eluting stents or bypass surgery for left main coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2016; 375 (23) 2223-2235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Stone GW, Kappetein AP, Sabik JF. et al; EXCEL Trial Investigators. Five-year outcomes after PCI or CABG for left main coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2019; 381 (19) 1820-1830
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Holm NR, Mäkikallio T, Lindsay MM. et al; NOBLE investigators. Percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass grafting in the treatment of unprotected left main stenosis: updated 5-year outcomes from the randomised, non-inferiority NOBLE trial. Lancet 2020; 395 (10219): 191-199
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Moussa ID, Klein LW, Shah B. et al. Consideration of a new definition of clinically relevant myocardial infarction after coronary revascularization: an expert consensus document from the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI). J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; 62 (17) 1563-1570
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Ruel M, Falk V, Farkouh ME. et al. Myocardial revascularization trials. Circulation 2018; 138 (25) 2943-2951
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Cho MS, Ahn J-M, Lee C-H. et al. Differential rates and clinical significance of periprocedural myocardial infarction after stenting or bypass surgery for multivessel coronary disease according to various definitions. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2017; 10 (15) 1498-1507
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Serruys PW, Morice M-C, Kappetein AP. et al; SYNTAX Investigators. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2009; 360 (10) 961-972
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Brown DC, Brown E. Surgeons withdraw support for heart disease advice. BBC News 2019
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Khan MS, Ochani RK, Shaikh A. et al. Fragility index in cardiovascular randomized controlled trials. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2019; 12: e005755
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Should Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Be Considered for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease? Insights From a Bayesian Reanalysis of the EXCEL Trial | Cardiology | JAMA Internal Medicine | JAMA Network 2020;180(7):1002–1003
  • 30 EXCEL Leaders Answer Back After BBC Exposé. Medscape
  • 31 EACTSJM A. EACTS responds to BBC Newsnight's investigation on the EXCEL trial. EACTS 2019
  • 32 Cohen D, Brown E. New England Journal of Medicine reviews controversial stent study. BMJ British Medical Journal Publishing Group; 2020: 368
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ. et al; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J 2017; 38 (36) 2739-2791
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Stacey D, Légaré F, Col NF. et al. Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; (01) CD001431
    PubMedGoogle Scholar