Comparison of successful percutaneous coronary intervention versus optimal medical therapy in patients with coronary chronic total occlusion.

BACKGROUND: Chronic total occlusion (CTO) is a challenging entity in coronary interventions. With improvements in technology and techniques, success rates for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of CTO continue to improve. However, the clinical benefits of PCI remain unclear. The aim of the study was to determine the effectiveness of successful PCI on clinical outcomes using drug-eluting stents in patients with CTO.

METHODS: From 2004 to 2010, we analyzed 898 patients with at least one CTO who underwent successful PCI (n=424, 448 lesions) or only medical treatment (n=474, 519 lesions) from a multicenter registry. The primary outcome was all-cause death.

RESULTS: During a median of 2.2 years, incidence rate of all-cause death after successful PCI was lower than that after medical treatment (10.6% and 17.5%, p=0.004). However, the multivariate Cox proportional hazards model showed that successful PCI was not associated with improvement in mortality compared to medical treatment [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.84, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57-1.24, p=0.38]. Comparable results were obtained after propensity-score matching. Subgroup analysis of propensity-score matched population demonstrated that patients with age under 65 years benefited from successful PCI (HR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08-0.75, p for interaction=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS: In patients considered for CTO intervention, medical treatment appears to be associated with a similar mortality compared to successful PCI. Successful CTO PCI might be associated with survival benefit in younger patients compared to medical treatment.