Background: Contemporary guidelines by the European Society for Cardiology and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association for the treatment of non-acute myocardial ischaemic syndromes dispute the value of revascularisation and differ in their recommendation to perform revascularisation. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed, evaluating the strength of evidence for the comparative incremental effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) over medical therapy on long-term outcomes. Methods: A hierarchical Bayesian network meta-analysis was designed (PROSPERO CRD42024541215, date 20 May 2024), including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2005 and 10 June 2025, which consisted of three initial treatment modalities: optimal medical therapy (OMT), PCI+OMT and CABG+OMT. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at maximum follow-up; secondary outcomes were trates of the rates of myocardial infarction, stroke and re-revascularisation at maximum follow-up, expressed in HRs and 95% credible intervals (CrIs), accompanied by surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) scores. Results: 10 RCTs, comprising 10 742 patients, were included. For all-cause mortality, the estimated median HR of CABG+OMT versus OMT was 0.84 (95% CrI 0.68–1.07); the HR of PCI+OMT versus OMT was 0.93 (0.79–1.16); and the HR of CABG+OMT versus PCI+OMT was 0.91 (0.71–1.13). The SUCRAs of a CABG+OMT strategy ranking as the optimal revascularisation treatment regarding mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke and re-revascularisation were 88.1%, 99.7%, 17.5% and 99.5%, respectively. Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses, including in the node-splitting models. Conclusions: This Bayesian network meta-analysis found that an initial CABG (+OMT) revascularisation strategy was associated with higher probabilities of optimal outcomes, with the exception of stroke, compared with an initial PCI (+OMT) revascularisation strategy, although CrIs overlapped, suggesting that some uncertainty remains. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024541215.
Background: Contemporary guidelines by the European Society for Cardiology and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association for the treatment of non-acute myocardial ischaemic syndromes dispute the value of revascularisation and differ in their recommendation to perform revascularisation. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed, evaluating the strength of evidence for the comparative incremental effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) over medical therapy on long-term outcomes. Methods: A hierarchical Bayesian network meta-analysis was designed (PROSPERO CRD42024541215, date 20 May 2024), including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2005 and 10 June 2025, which consisted of three initial treatment modalities: optimal medical therapy (OMT), PCI+OMT and CABG+OMT. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at maximum follow-up; secondary outcomes were trates of the rates of myocardial infarction, stroke and re-revascularisation at maximum follow-up, expressed in HRs and 95% credible intervals (CrIs), accompanied by surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) scores. Results: 10 RCTs, comprising 10 742 patients, were included. For all-cause mortality, the estimated median HR of CABG+OMT versus OMT was 0.84 (95% CrI 0.68–1.07); the HR of PCI+OMT versus OMT was 0.93 (0.79–1.16); and the HR of CABG+OMT versus PCI+OMT was 0.91 (0.71–1.13). The SUCRAs of a CABG+OMT strategy ranking as the optimal revascularisation treatment regarding mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke and re-revascularisation were 88.1%, 99.7%, 17.5% and 99.5%, respectively. Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses, including in the node-splitting models. Conclusions: This Bayesian network meta-analysis found that an initial CABG (+OMT) revascularisation strategy was associated with higher probabilities of optimal outcomes, with the exception of stroke, compared with an initial PCI (+OMT) revascularisation strategy, although CrIs overlapped, suggesting that some uncertainty remains. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024541215.
Revascularisation strategies for non-acute myocardial ischaemic syndromes / Kawczynski, M.J., Barili, F., Brophy, J.M., De Caterina, R., Biondi Zoccai, G., Anselmi, A., Boden, W.E., Parolari, A., Heuts, S., Albuquerque, A., Almeida, R., Anselmi, A., Almeida, R., Anselmi, A., Beurtheret, S., Biondi-Zoccai, G., Boden, W., Borger, M., Brophy, J., Buttiglione, G., et al.. - In: HEART. - ISSN 1355-6037. - 112:10(2026), pp. 530-538. [10.1136/heartjnl-2025-326101]
Revascularisation strategies for non-acute myocardial ischaemic syndromes
Zenati M.;
2026-01-01
Abstract
Background: Contemporary guidelines by the European Society for Cardiology and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association for the treatment of non-acute myocardial ischaemic syndromes dispute the value of revascularisation and differ in their recommendation to perform revascularisation. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed, evaluating the strength of evidence for the comparative incremental effectiveness of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) over medical therapy on long-term outcomes. Methods: A hierarchical Bayesian network meta-analysis was designed (PROSPERO CRD42024541215, date 20 May 2024), including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between 2005 and 10 June 2025, which consisted of three initial treatment modalities: optimal medical therapy (OMT), PCI+OMT and CABG+OMT. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at maximum follow-up; secondary outcomes were trates of the rates of myocardial infarction, stroke and re-revascularisation at maximum follow-up, expressed in HRs and 95% credible intervals (CrIs), accompanied by surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) scores. Results: 10 RCTs, comprising 10 742 patients, were included. For all-cause mortality, the estimated median HR of CABG+OMT versus OMT was 0.84 (95% CrI 0.68–1.07); the HR of PCI+OMT versus OMT was 0.93 (0.79–1.16); and the HR of CABG+OMT versus PCI+OMT was 0.91 (0.71–1.13). The SUCRAs of a CABG+OMT strategy ranking as the optimal revascularisation treatment regarding mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke and re-revascularisation were 88.1%, 99.7%, 17.5% and 99.5%, respectively. Results were consistent across sensitivity analyses, including in the node-splitting models. Conclusions: This Bayesian network meta-analysis found that an initial CABG (+OMT) revascularisation strategy was associated with higher probabilities of optimal outcomes, with the exception of stroke, compared with an initial PCI (+OMT) revascularisation strategy, although CrIs overlapped, suggesting that some uncertainty remains. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024541215.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione
