Daniel S. Berman

BACKGROUND: In patients with stable coronary artery disease, it remains unclear whether an initial management strategy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with intensive pharmacologic therapy and lifestyle intervention (optimal medical therapy) is superior to optimal medical therapy alone in reducing the risk of cardiovascular events. METHODS: We conducted a randomized trial involving 2287 patients who had objective evidence of myocardial ischemia and significant coronary artery disease at 50 U.S. and Canadian centers. Between 1999 and 2004, we assigned 1149 patients to undergo PCI with optimal medical therapy (PCI group) and 1138 to receive optimal medical therapy alone (medical-therapy group). The primary outcome was death from any cause and nonfatal myocardial infarction during a follow-up period of 2.5 to 7.0 years (median, 4.6). RESULTS: There were 211 primary events in the PCI group and 202 events in the medical-therapy group. The 4.6-year cumulative primary-event rates were 19.0% in the PCI group and 18.5% in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio for the PCI group, 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87 to 1.27; P=0.62). There were no significant differences between the PCI group and the medical-therapy group in the composite of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke (20.0% vs. 19.5%; hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.27; P=0.62); hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome (12.4% vs. 11.8%; hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.84 to 1.37; P=0.56); or myocardial infarction (13.2% vs. 12.3%; hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.43; P=0.33). CONCLUSIONS: As an initial management strategy in patients with stable coronary artery disease, PCI did not reduce the risk of death, myocardial infarction, or other major cardiovascular events when added to optimal medical therapy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00007657 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

BACKGROUND: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS: Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, -1.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01471522.).

BACKGROUND: Extent and severity of myocardial ischemia are determinants of risk for patients with coronary artery disease, and ischemia reduction is an important therapeutic goal. The Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) nuclear substudy compared the effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ischemia reduction added to optimal medical therapy (OMT) with the use of myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (MPS). METHODS AND RESULTS: Of the 2287 COURAGE patients, 314 were enrolled in this substudy of serial rest/stress MPS performed before treatment and 6 to 18 months (mean=374+/-50 days) after randomization using paired exercise (n=84) or vasodilator stress (n=230). A blinded core laboratory analyzed quantitative MPS measures of percent ischemic myocardium. Moderate to severe ischemia encumbered > or = 10% myocardium. The primary end point was > or = 5% reduction in ischemic myocardium at follow-up. Treatment groups had similar baseline characteristics. At follow-up, the reduction in ischemic myocardium was greater with PCI+OMT (-2.7%; 95% confidence interval, -1.7%, -3.8%) than with OMT (-0.5%; 95% confidence interval, -1.6%, 0.6%; P<0.0001). More PCI+OMT patients exhibited significant ischemia reduction (33% versus 19%; P=0.0004), especially patients with moderate to severe pretreatment ischemia (78% versus 52%; P=0.007). Patients with ischemia reduction had lower unadjusted risk for death or myocardial infarction (P=0.037 [risk-adjusted P=0.26]), particularly if baseline ischemia was moderate to severe (P=0.001 [risk-adjusted P=0.08]). Death or myocardial infarction rates ranged from 0% to 39% for patients with no residual ischemia to > or = 10% residual ischemia on follow-up MPS (P=0.002 [risk-adjusted P=0.09]). CONCLUSIONS: In COURAGE patients who underwent serial MPS, adding PCI to OMT resulted in greater reduction in ischemia compared with OMT alone. Our findings suggest a treatment target of > or = 5% ischemia reduction with OMT with or without coronary revascularization.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between the amount of inducible ischemia present on stress myocardial perfusion single photon emission computed tomography (myocardial perfusion stress [MPS]) and the presence of a short-term survival benefit with early revascularization versus medical therapy is not clearly defined. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 10 627 consecutive patients who underwent exercise or adenosine MPS and had no prior myocardial infarction or revascularization were followed up (90.6% complete; mean: 1.9+/-0.6 years). Cardiac death occurred in 146 patients (1.4%). Treatment received within 60 days after MPS defined subgroups undergoing revascularization (671 patients, 2.8% mortality) or medical therapy (MT) (9956 patients, 1.3% mortality; P=0.0004). To adjust for nonrandomization of treatment, a propensity score was developed using logistic regression to model the decision to refer to revascularization. This model (chi2=1822, c index=0.94, P<10-7) identified inducible ischemia and anginal symptoms as the most powerful predictors (83%, 6% of overall chi2) and was incorporated into survival models. On the basis of the Cox proportional hazards model predicting cardiac death (chi2=539, P<0.0001), patients undergoing MT demonstrated a survival advantage over patients undergoing revascularization in the setting of no or mild ischemia, whereas patients undergoing revascularization had an increasing survival benefit over patients undergoing MT when moderate to severe ischemia was present. Furthermore, increasing survival benefit for revascularization over MT was noted in higher risk patients (elderly, adenosine stress, and women, especially those with diabetes). CONCLUSIONS: Revascularization compared with MT had greater survival benefit (absolute and relative) in patients with moderate to large amounts of inducible ischemia. These findings have significant consequences for future approaches to post-single photon emission computed tomography patient management if confirmed by prospective evaluations.