Cited by 70Coronary Interventions and DiagnosticsCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsCardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques

Clinical and Angiographic Risk Stratification and Differential Impact on Treatment Outcomes in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) Trial

Open access
Brooks, Maria Mori, Chaitman, Bernard R., Nesto, Richard W., Hardison, Regina M., Feit, Frederick, Gersh, Bernard J., Krone, Ronald J., Sako, Edward Y. +6 more·2012·Circulation

Abstract

Background—: The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial assigned patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus to prompt coronary revascularization plus intensive medical therapy versus intensive medical therapy alone and reported no significant difference in mortality. Among patients selected for coronary artery bypass graft surgery, prompt coronary revascularization was associated with a significant reduction in death/myocardial infarction/stroke compared with intensive medical therapy. We hypothesized that clinical and angiographic risk stratification would affect the effectiveness of the treatments overall and within revascularization strata. Methods and Results—: An angiographic risk score was developed from variables assessed at randomization; independent prognostic factors were myocardial jeopardy index, total number of coronary lesions, prior coronary revascularization, and left ventricular ejection fraction. The Framingham Risk Score for patients with coronary disease was used to summarize clinical risk. Cardiovascular event rates were compared by assigned treatment within high-risk and low-risk subgroups. Overall, no outcome differences between the intensive medical therapy and prompt coronary revascularization groups were seen in any risk stratum. The 5-year risk of death/myocardial infarction/stroke was 36.8% for intensive medical therapy compared with 24.8% for prompt coronary revascularization among the 381 coronary artery bypass graft surgery–selected patients in the highest angiographic risk tertile ( P =0.005); this treatment effect was amplified in patients with both high angiographic and high Framingham risk (47.3% intensive medical therapy versus 27.1% prompt coronary revascularization; P =0.010; hazard ratio=2.10; P =0.009). Treatment group differences were not significant in other clinical-angiographic risk groups within the coronary artery bypass graft surgery stratum, or in any subgroups within the percutaneous coronary intervention stratum. Conclusion—: Among patients with diabetes mellitus and stable ischemic heart disease, a strategy of prompt coronary artery bypass graft surgery significantly reduces the rate of death/myocardial infarction MI/stroke in those with extensive coronary artery disease or impaired left ventricular function. Clinical Trial Registration—: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00006305.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.112.092973

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brooks, M. M., Chaitman, B. R., Nesto, R. W., Hardison, R. M., Feit, F., Gersh, B. J., Krone, R. J., Sako, E. Y., Rogers, W. J., Garber, A. J., King, S. B., Davidson, C. J., Ikeno, F., & Frye, R. L.
Affiliations
Lahey Hospital and Medical Center (US)
Venue
Circulation
Published
2012-10-23
Volume
126
Issue
17
Pages
2115-2124
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2161418914
Cited by
70
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 10
FWCI
8.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Circulation (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (U01HL063804, U01HL061748, U01HL061744, R21HL121495, U01HL061746)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Coronary Interventions and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Cardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cardiac and Coronary Surgery Techniques
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, coronary artery bypass grafting, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary revascularization, risk stratification, Framingham risk score, intensive medical therapy, stable coronary artery disease, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, left ventricular ejection fraction, BARI 2D trial
MeSH terms
Aged, Coronary Artery Bypass, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary, Treatment Outcome, Coronary Angiography, Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

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