Influence of practice patterns on outcome among countries enrolled in the SYNTAX trial: 5‐year results between percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting†

OBJECTIVES To examine differences among participating countries in baseline characteristics, clinical practice, medication strategies and outcomes of patients randomized to coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention in the SYNTAX trial. METHODS In SYNTAX, centres in 18 different countries enrolled 1800 patients, of which 8 countries enrolled ≥80 patients, what was projected to be a large enough sample size to be included in the analysis. Baseline characteristics, practice patterns and clinical outcomes were compared between the USA (n = 245), the UK (n = 267), Italy (n = 197), France (n = 208), Germany (n = 179), Netherlands (n = 148), Belgium (n = 91) and Hungary (n = 83). The remaining patients from other participating countries were pooled together (n = 382). RESULTS Five‐year results demonstrated significantly different outcomes between countries. After adjustment, percutaneous coronary intervention patients in France had lower rates of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37‐0.98], while the incidence of repeat revascularization was higher in Hungary (HR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.14‐3.42). Coronary artery bypass grafting showed the lowest rate of repeat revascularization in the UK (HR = 0.32, 95% CI 0.12‐0.85). There were numerous differences in the risk profile of patients between participating countries, as well as marked differences in surgical practice across countries in the use of blood cardioplegia (range 3.1‐89.0%; P < 0.001), bilateral internal mammary artery usage (range 7.8‐68.2%; P < 0.001) and off‐pump procedures (range 3.9‐44.4%; P < 0.001). Variation was also found for percutaneous coronary intervention in the number of implanted stents (range 4.0 ± 2.3 to 6.1 ± 2.6; P < 0.001) as well as for the entire stents length (range 69.0 ± 45.1 to 124.1 ± 60.9; P < 0.001). Remarkable differences were observed in the prescription of post‐coronary artery bypass grafting medication in terms of acetylsalicylic acid (range 79.6‐95.0%; P = 0.004), thienopyridine (6.8‐31.1%; P < 0.001) and statins (41.3‐89.1%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Patient characteristics and clinical patterns are significantly different between countries, resulting in significantly different 5‐year outcomes. This article presents specific data that can further improve outcomes in each country. Clinical Trials Registry NCT00114972.

[1]  D. Altman,et al.  Randomized Trial of Bilateral versus Single Internal-Thoracic-Artery Grafts. , 2016, The New England journal of medicine.

[2]  J. D. Mitchell,et al.  The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines on Arterial Conduits for Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting. , 2016, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[3]  M. Mack,et al.  Causes of Death Following PCI Versus CABG in Complex CAD: 5-Year Follow-Up of SYNTAX. , 2016, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[4]  S. Solomon,et al.  Global variation in clinical profile, management, and post‐discharge outcomes among patients hospitalized for worsening chronic heart failure: findings from the ASTRONAUT trial , 2015, European journal of heart failure.

[5]  Helmut Baumgartner,et al.  2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: the Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous , 2014, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[6]  D. Altman,et al.  Effect of Bilateral Internal Mammary Artery Grafts on Long-Term Survival: A Meta-Analysis Approach , 2014, Circulation.

[7]  P. Serruys,et al.  4-year clinical outcomes and predictors of repeat revascularization in patients treated with new-generation drug-eluting stents: a report from the RESOLUTE All-Comers trial (A Randomized Comparison of a Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent With an Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[8]  Volkmar Falk,et al.  2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Ca , 2014, European heart journal.

[9]  V. Falk,et al.  Coronary artery bypass grafting: Part 2--optimizing outcomes and future prospects. , 2013, European heart journal.

[10]  S. Pocock,et al.  International differences in treatment effect: do they really exist and why? , 2013, European heart journal.

[11]  F. Grover,et al.  Repeat Coronary Revascularization After Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery in Older Adults: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons’ National Experience, 1991–2007 , 2013, Circulation.

[12]  Antonio Colombo,et al.  Coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with three-vessel disease and left main coronary disease: 5-year follow-up of the randomised, clinical SYNTAX trial , 2013, The Lancet.

[13]  G. Stone,et al.  Adverse event rates following primary PCI for STEMI at US and non-US hospitals: three-year analysis from the HORIZONS-AMI trial. , 2013, EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

[14]  K. Swedberg,et al.  Relationship between clinical trial site enrollment with participant characteristics, protocol completion, and outcomes: insights from the EVEREST (Efficacy of Vasopressin Antagonism in Heart Failure: Outcome Study with Tolvaptan) trial. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[15]  M. Shishehbor,et al.  Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes , 2013 .

[16]  A. Go,et al.  Use of medications for secondary prevention after coronary bypass surgery compared with percutaneous coronary intervention. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[17]  Akshay S. Desai,et al.  Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[18]  C. O'connor,et al.  Implications of geographical variation on clinical outcomes of cardiovascular trials. , 2012, American heart journal.

[19]  M. Mack,et al.  Risk profile and 3-year outcomes from the SYNTAX percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting nested registries. , 2012, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[20]  B. Gersh Ticagrelor Compared With Clopidogrel by Geographic Region in the Platelet Inhibition and Patient Outcomes (PLATO) Trial , 2012 .

[21]  Hani Jneid,et al.  2012 ACCF/AHA focused update of the guideline for the management of patients with unstable angina/non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (updating the 2007 guideline and replacing the 2011 focused update): a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Forc , 2012, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[22]  H. Ulmer,et al.  Second Internal Thoracic Artery Versus Radial Artery in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Long-Term, Propensity Score–Matched Follow-Up Study , 2011, Circulation.

[23]  P. Mody,et al.  Ticagrelor Compared With Clopidogrel by Geographic Region in the Platelet Inhibition and Patient , 2011 .

[24]  Charla A Andrews Ethical and scientific implications of the globalization of clinical research. , 2009, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  S. Pocock,et al.  Coronary artery bypass surgery compared with percutaneous coronary interventions for multivessel disease: a collaborative analysis of individual patient data from ten randomised trials , 2009, The Lancet.

[26]  J. Tu,et al.  Ecological Studies and Cardiovascular Outcomes Research , 2008, Circulation.

[27]  K. Swedberg,et al.  Continental differences in clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes in patients hospitalized with worsening heart failure results from the EVEREST (Efficacy of Vasopressin Antagonism in Heart Failure: Outcome Study with Tolvaptan) program. , 2008, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[28]  Patrick W Serruys,et al.  The SYNergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with TAXus and cardiac surgery (SYNTAX) study: design, rationale, and run-in phase. , 2006, American heart journal.

[29]  A. Go,et al.  A systematic review of the effects of physician specialty on the treatment of coronary disease and heart failure in the United States. , 2000, The American journal of medicine.