Shemin, Richard J.

Background —The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) included 4039 patients with multivessel coronary artery disease; 1829 consented to randomization, and 2010 did not but were followed up in a registry. Thus, we can evaluate the outcome of physician-guided versus random assignment of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). Methods and Results —We compared the baseline features and outcomes for PTCA and CABG in the overall registry and its predesignated subgroups. We assessed the impact of treatment by choice versus random assignment by comparing the results in the registry with those of the randomized trial. Statistical adjustments for differences in baseline characteristics were made. Within the registry, nearly twice as many patients were selected for PTCA (1189) as CABG (625); mortality at 7 years was similar for PTCA (13.9%) and CABG (14.2%) ( P =0.66) before and after adjustment for baseline differences between patients selected for PTCA versus CABG (adjusted RR, 1.02; P =0.86). In contrast to the randomized trial, the 7-year mortality rate of treated diabetics in the registry was equally high (26%) with PTCA or CABG. Seven-year mortality was higher for patients undergoing PTCA in the randomized trial than in the registry (19.1% versus 13.9%, P <0.01) but not for those undergoing CABG (15.6% versus 14.2%, P =0.57). The adjusted relative mortality risk for PTCA in the randomized versus registry population was 1.17 ( P =0.16). Conclusions —BARI physicians were able to select PTCA rather than CABG for 65% of registry patients who underwent revascularization without compromising long-term survival either in the overall population or in treated diabetics.

Background —Patients with treated diabetes in the randomized-trial segment of the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) who were randomized to initial revascularization with PTCA had significantly worse 5-year survival than patients assigned to CABG. This treatment difference was not seen among diabetic patients eligible for BARI who opted to select their mode of revascularization. We hypothesized that differences in patient characteristics, assessed and unmeasured, together with the treatment selection in the registry, at least partially account for this discrepancy. Methods and Results —Among diabetics taking insulin or oral hypoglycemic drugs at entry, angiographic and clinical presentations were comparable between randomized and registry patients. However, more registry patients were white, and registry diabetics tended to be more educated and more physically active and to report better quality of life. Procedural characteristics and in-hospital complications were comparable. The 5-year all-cause mortality rate was 34.5% in randomized diabetic patients assigned to PTCA versus 19.4% in CABG patients ( P =0.0024; relative risk [RR]=1.87); corresponding cardiac mortality rates were 23.4% and 8.2%, respectively ( P =0.0002; RR=3.10). The CABG benefit was more apparent among patients requiring insulin. In the registry, all-cause mortality was 14.4% for PTCA versus 14.9% for CABG ( P =0.86, RR=1.10), with corresponding cardiac mortality rates of 7.5% and 6.0%, respectively ( P =0.73; RR=1.07). These RRs in the registry increased to 1.29 and 1.41, respectively, after adjustment for all known differences between treatment groups. Conclusions —BARI registry results are not inconsistent with the finding in the randomized trial that initial CABG is associated with better long-term survival than PTCA in treated diabetic patients with multivessel coronary disease suitable for either surgical or catheter-based revascularization.