Raw Data Library
About
Aims and ScopeAdvisory Board Members
More
Who We Are?
User Guide
Green Science
​
​
Sign inGet started
​
​

About
Aims and ScopeAdvisory Board Members
More
Who We Are?
User GuideGreen Science

Sign inGet started
RDL logo

Verified research datasets. Instant access. Built for collaboration.

Navigation

About

Aims and Scope

Advisory Board Members

More

Who We Are?

Add Raw Data

User Guide

Legal

Privacy Policy

Terms of Service

Support

Got an issue? Email us directly.

Email: info@rawdatalibrary.netOpen Mail App
​
​

© 2025 Raw Data Library. All rights reserved.
PrivacyTerms
  1. Raw Data Library
  2. /
  3. Publications
  4. /
  5. Clinical outcomes with percutaneous coronary revascularization vs coronary artery bypass grafting surgery in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of 6 randomized trials and 4,686 patients

Verified authors • Institutional access • DOI aware
50,000+ researchers120,000+ datasets90% satisfaction
Article
English
2017

Clinical outcomes with percutaneous coronary revascularization vs coronary artery bypass grafting surgery in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of 6 randomized trials and 4,686 patients

0 Datasets

0 Files

English
2017
American Heart Journal
Vol 190
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2017.05.005

Get instant academic access to this publication’s datasets.

Create free accountHow it works

Frequently asked questions

Is access really free for academics and students?

Yes. After verification, you can browse and download datasets at no cost. Some premium assets may require author approval.

How is my data protected?

Files are stored on encrypted storage. Access is restricted to verified users and all downloads are logged.

Can I request additional materials?

Yes, message the author after sign-up to request supplementary files or replication code.

Advance your research today

Join 50,000+ researchers worldwide. Get instant access to peer-reviewed datasets, advanced analytics, and global collaboration tools.

Get free academic accessLearn more
✓ Immediate verification • ✓ Free institutional access • ✓ Global collaboration
Access Research Data

Join our academic network to download verified datasets and collaborate with researchers worldwide.

Get Free Access
Institutional SSO
Secure
This PDF is not available in different languages.
No localized PDFs are currently available.
Patrick W. Serruys
Patrick W. Serruys

Imperial College London

Verified
Tullio Palmerini
Patrick W. Serruys
A. Pieter Kappetein
+18 more

Abstract

Some but not all randomized controlled trials (RCT) have suggested that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents may be an acceptable alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCAD). We therefore aimed to compare the risk of all-cause mortality between PCI and CABG in patients with ULMCAD in a pairwise meta-analysis of RCT. Methods Randomized controlled trials comparing PCI vs CABG for the treatment of ULMCAD were searched through MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, and proceedings of international meetings. Results Six trials including 4,686 randomized patients were identified. After a median follow-up of 39 months, there were no significant differences between PCI vs CABG in the risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.99, 95% CI 0.76-1.30) or cardiac mortality. However, a significant interaction for cardiac mortality (P interaction= .03) was apparent between randomization arm and SYNTAX score, such that the relative risk for mortality tended to be lower with PCI compared with CABG among patients in the lower SYNTAX score tertile, similar in the intermediate tertile, and higher in the upper SYNTAX score tertile. Percutaneous coronary intervention compared with CABG was associated with a similar long-term composite risk of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.82-1.37), with fewer events within 30 days after PCI offset by fewer events after 30 days with CABG (P interaction < .0001). Percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with greater rates of unplanned revascularization compared with CABG (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.47-2.07). Conclusions In patients undergoing revascularization for ULMCAD, PCI was associated with similar rates of mortality compared with CABG at a median follow-up of 39 months, but with an interaction effect suggesting relatively lower mortality with PCI in patients with low SYNTAX score and relatively lower mortality with CABG in patients with high SYNTAX score. Both procedures resulted in similar long-term composite rates of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, with PCI offering an early safety advantage and CABG demonstrating greater durability.

How to cite this publication

Tullio Palmerini, Patrick W. Serruys, A. Pieter Kappetein, Philippe Généreux, Diego Della Riva, Maria Letizia Bacchi Reggiani, Evald Høj Christiansen, Niels Ramsing Holm, Leif Thuesen, Timo H. Mäkikallio, Marie Claude Morice, Jung‐Min Ahn, Seung‐Jung Park, Hölger Thiele, Enno Boudriot, M. Sabatino, Mattia Romanello, Giuseppe Biondi‐Zoccai, Raphael Cavalcante, Joseph F. Sabik, Gregg W. Stone (2017). Clinical outcomes with percutaneous coronary revascularization vs coronary artery bypass grafting surgery in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of 6 randomized trials and 4,686 patients. American Heart Journal, 190, pp. 54-63, DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2017.05.005.

Related publications

Why join Raw Data Library?

Quality

Datasets shared by verified academics with rich metadata and previews.

Control

Authors choose access levels; downloads are logged for transparency.

Free for Academia

Students and faculty get instant access after verification.

Publication Details

Type

Article

Year

2017

Authors

21

Datasets

0

Total Files

0

Language

English

Journal

American Heart Journal

DOI

10.1016/j.ahj.2017.05.005

Join Research Community

Access datasets from 50,000+ researchers worldwide with institutional verification.

Get Free Access