Diabetic and Nondiabetic Patients With Left Main and/or 3-Vessel Coronary Artery Disease
Open accessAbstract
Objectives This study was designed to compare contemporary surgical revascularization (coronary artery bypass graft surgery [CABG]) versus TAXUS Express (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in diabetic and nondiabetic patients with left main and/or 3-vessel disease. Background Although the prevalence of diabetes mellitus is increasing, the optimal coronary revascularization strategy in diabetic patients with complex multivessel disease remains controversial. Methods The SYNTAX (SYNergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with TAXus and cardiac surgery) study randomly assigned 1,800 patients (452 with medically treated diabetes) to receive PES or CABG. Results The overall 1-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event rate was higher among diabetic patients treated with PES compared with CABG, but the revascularization method did not impact the death/stroke/myocardial infarction rate for nondiabetic patients (6.8% CABG vs. 6.8% PES, p = 0.97) or for diabetic patients (10.3% CABG vs. 10.1% PES, p = 0.96). The presence of diabetes was associated with significantly increased mortality after either revascularization treatment. The incidence of stroke was higher among nondiabetic patients after CABG (2.2% vs. PES 0.5%, p = 0.006). Compared with CABG, mortality was higher after PES use for diabetic patients with highly complex lesions (4.1% vs. 13.5%, p = 0.04). Revascularization with PES resulted in higher repeat revascularization for nondiabetic patients (5.7% vs. 11.1%, p < 0.001) and diabetic patients (6.4% vs. 20.3%, p < 0.001). Conclusions Subgroup analyses suggest that the 1-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event rate is higher among diabetic patients with left main and/or 3-vessel disease treated with PES compared with CABG, driven by an increase in repeat revascularization. However, the composite safety end point (death/stroke/myocardial infarction) is comparable between the 2 treatment options for diabetic and nondiabetic patients. Although further study is needed, these exploratory results may extend the evidence for PES use in selected patients with less complex left main and/or 3-vessel lesions. (SYNergy Between PCI With TAXus and Cardiac Surgery [SYNTAX]; NCT00114972).
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The balance of benefit and risk for each revascularization approach depends on the extent and complexity of coronary disease and the patient's comorbidities.
“The relative benefit and risk of each revascularization strategy vary by the extent and complexity of CAD and the patient’s underlying comorbid state.270”
From Clinical management of stable coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association (2020) · cites this paper as [270]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 32 · Cited by 290
- Authors
- Banning, A. P., Westaby, S., Morice, M.-C., Kappetein, A. P., Mohr, F. W., Berti, S., Glauber, M., Kellett, M. A., Kramer, R. S., Leadley, K., Dawkins, K. D., & Serruys, P. W.
- Affiliations
- John Radcliffe Hospital (GB)
- Hôpital Privé Jacques Cartier (FR)
- Erasmus MC (NL)
- Leipzig University (DE)
- Istituto di Fisiologia Clinica (IT)
- Maine Medical Center (US)
- Boston Scientific (United States) (US)
- Corresponding author
- Banning, Adrian P.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of the American College of Cardiology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2010-03
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1067-1075
- ISSN
- 0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2120181058
- Cited by
- 290
- References
- 32
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 59
- FWCI
- 54.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of the American College of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
- EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Boston Scientific
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
- Keywords
- diabetes mellitus, coronary artery bypass grafting, paclitaxel-eluting stents, left main coronary artery disease, multivessel coronary artery disease, coronary revascularization, SYNTAX trial, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, repeat revascularization, mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, subgroup analysis, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery disease
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Coronary Artery Bypass, Coronary Artery Disease, Diabetes Mellitus, Diabetic Angiopathies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary, Treatment Outcome, Paclitaxel, Tubulin Modulators, Drug-Eluting Stents
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review