Meta-analysis comparing percutaneous coronary intervention with coronary artery bypass grafting for non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome in patients with multivessel or left main disease

Outcomes of patients presenting with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) with multivessel coronary disease (MVD) and/or unprotected left main coronary artery disease (CAD) revascularized with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is not well defined. MEDLINE/PubMed and EMBASE/Ovid were queried for studies that investigated PCI vs CABG in this disease subset. The primary outcome was major cardiac adverse events (MACE) at 30 days and long-term follow-up (3-5 years). The final analysis included 9 studies with a total of 9299 patients. No significant difference was observed between PCI and CABG in 30 days MACE (risk ratio [RR] 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.38-2.39, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke. A meta-regression analysis revealed patients with a history of PCI had higher risk of MACE with PCI as compared with CABG. At long-term follow-up, PCI compared with CABG was associated with higher risk of MACE (RR 1.52; 95% CI 1.28-1.81), myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization, while no difference was observed in the risk of stroke and all-cause mortality. In patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD or unprotected left main CAD, no differences were observed in the clinical outcomes between PCI and CABG at 30 days follow-up. With long-term follow-up, PCI was associated with a higher risk of MACE