Background: There are limited data from randomized trials to guide a specific follow-up surveillance approach after myocardial revascularization. Whether a follow-up strategy that includes routine functional testing improves clinical outcomes among highrisk patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is uncertain. Methods: We randomly assigned 1706 patients with high-risk anatomical or clinical characteristics who had undergone PCI to a follow-up strategy of routine functional testing (nuclear stress testing, exercise electrocardiography, or stress echocardiography) at 1 year after PCI or to standard care alone. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina at 2 years. Key secondary outcomes included invasive coronary angiography and repeat revascularization. Results: The mean age of the patients was 64.7 years, 21.0% had left main disease, 43.5% had bifurcation disease, 69.8% had multivessel disease, 70.1% had diffuse long lesions, 38.7% had diabetes, and 96.4% had been treated with drug-eluting stents. At 2 years, a primary-outcome event had occurred in 46 of 849 patients (Kaplan-Meier estimate, 5.5%) in the functional-testing group and in 51 of 857 (Kaplan-Meier estimate, 6.0%) in the standard-care group (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 1.35; P = 0.62). There were no betweengroup differences with respect to the components of the primary outcome. At 2 years, 12.3% of the patients in the functional-testing group and 9.3% in the standard-care group had undergone invasive coronary angiography (difference, 2.99 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.01 to 5.99), and 8.1% and 5.8% of patients, respectively, had undergone repeat revascularization (difference, 2.23 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.22 to 4.68). Conclusions: Among high-risk patients who had undergone PCI, a follow-up strategy of routine functional testing, as compared with standard care alone, did not improve clinical outcomes at 2 years.
|Number of pages||11|
|Journal||New England Journal of Medicine|
|Publication status||Published - 2022 Sept 8|
Bibliographical noteFunding Information:
Supported by an investigator-initiated grant from the CardioVascular Research Foundation and Daewoong Pharmaceutical .
Supported by an investigator-initiated grant from the Cardio-Vascular Research Foundation and Daewoong Pharmaceutical.
Copyright © 2022 Massachusetts Medical Society.
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes