Revascularization in Stable Coronary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Abstract

The optimal management strategy for stable coronary artery disease (CAD) remains contentious. While revascularization benefits acute coronary syndromes, its role in stable CAD compared with medical therapy (MT) is less clear. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the safety and efficacy of coronary revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI] or coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]) versus MT in patients with stable CAD. A systematic search identified randomized trials comparing revascularization with optimal MT in stable CAD. Trials included documented CAD via angiography and excluded acute coronary syndromes. The primary safety endpoint was all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke. The primary efficacy endpoint also included unplanned revascularization, cardiac hospitalization, and major bleeding. The secondary endpoint included the percentage free from angina. Relative risk (RR) was calculated using random-effects models. Ten trials with 14,171 participants were included. There was no difference in the primary safety endpoint (RR 0.96 [0.90–1.03], p = 0.23). The primary efficacy endpoint favored revascularization (RR 0.81 [0.69–0.96], p = 0.01), primarily driven by unplanned revascularization (RR 0.5 [0.29–0.85], p = 0.01), though with increased procedural MI risk (RR 2.21 [1.44–3.39], p < 0.001). More patients had freedom from angina with revascularization compared with MT (71.8% vs. 62.9%, p < 0.001). In stable CAD, initial revascularization did not improve outcomes for the primary safety endpoint; however, it did reduce unplanned revascularization compared with MT. More patients had freedom from angina in the revascularization arm, at the cost of increased procedural MI. Decision regarding optimal management strategy for stable CAD remains a patient-centered discussion, recognizing the largely symptomatic rather than prognostic benefit that patients derive from early revascularization.

Keywords

coronary artery disease - percutaneous coronary intervention - coronary artery bypass grafting - medical therapy - meta-analysis - randomized controlled trials

^* These authors must be considered joint senior authors.

Publication History

Article published online:
23 July 2025

• References

• 1 Arnett DK, Blumenthal RS, Albert MA. et al. 2019 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2019; 140 (11) e596-e646
• 2 Nowbar AN, Gitto M, Howard JP, Francis DP, Al-Lamee R. Mortality from ischemic heart disease. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2019; 12 (06) e005375
• 3 Maron DJ, Hochman JS, Reynolds HR. et al.; ISCHEMIA Research Group. Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2020; 382 (15) 1395-1407
• 4 Bangalore S, Maron DJ, Stone GW, Hochman JS. Routine revascularization versus initial medical therapy for stable ischemic heart disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Circulation 2020; 142 (09) 841-857
• 5 Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151 (04) 264-269 , W64
• 6 Bangalore S, Maron DJ, O'Brien SM. et al.; ISCHEMIA-CKD Research Group. Management of coronary disease in patients with advanced kidney disease. N Engl J Med 2020; 382 (17) 1608-1618
• 7 Teo KK, Sedlis SP, Boden WE. et al.; COURAGE Trial Investigators. Optimal medical therapy with or without percutaneous coronary intervention in older patients with stable coronary disease: a pre-specified subset analysis of the COURAGE (Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive druG Evaluation) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 54 (14) 1303-1308
• 8 Al-Lamee R, Thompson D, Dehbi HM. et al.; ORBITA investigators. Percutaneous coronary intervention in stable angina (ORBITA): A double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2018; 391 (10115): 31-40
• 9 Park SJ, Ahn JM, Kang DY. et al; PREVENT Investigators. Preventive percutaneous coronary intervention versus optimal medical therapy alone for the treatment of vulnerable atherosclerotic coronary plaques (PREVENT): A multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2024; 403 (10438): 1753-1765
• 10 Nishigaki K, Yamazaki T, Kitabatake A. et al.; Japanese Stable Angina Pectoris Study Investigators. Percutaneous coronary intervention plus medical therapy reduces the incidence of acute coronary syndrome more effectively than initial medical therapy only among patients with low-risk coronary artery disease a randomized, comparative, multicenter study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2008; 1 (05) 469-479
• 11 De Bruyne B, Fearon WF, Pijls NH. et al.; FAME 2 Trial Investigators. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI for stable coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2014; 371 (13) 1208-1217
• 12 Zimmermann FM, Ferrara A, Johnson NP. et al. Deferral vs. performance of percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally non-significant coronary stenosis: 15-year follow-up of the DEFER trial. Eur Heart J 2015; 36 (45) 3182-3188
• 13 Boden WE, O'Rourke RA, Teo KK. et al.; COURAGE Trial Research Group. Optimal medical therapy with or without PCI for stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med 2007; 356 (15) 1503-1516
• 14 Frye RL, August P, Brooks MM. et al.; BARI 2D Study Group. A randomized trial of therapies for type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2009; 360 (24) 2503-2515
• 15 Pfisterer M. Trial of Invasive versus Medical therapy in Elderly patients Investigators. Long-term outcome in elderly patients with chronic angina managed invasively versus by optimized medical therapy: four-year follow-up of the randomized Trial of Invasive versus Medical therapy in Elderly patients (TIME). Circulation 2004; 110 (10) 1213-1218
• 16 Navarese EP, Lansky AJ, Kereiakes DJ. et al. Cardiac mortality in patients randomised to elective coronary revascularisation plus medical therapy or medical therapy alone: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J 2021; 42 (45) 4638-4651
• 17 Bi L, Geng Y, Wang Y. et al. An updated meta-analysis of optimal medical therapy with or without invasive therapy in patients with stable coronary artery disease. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2024; 24 (01) 335
• 18 Stone GW, Maehara A, Lansky AJ. et al.; PROSPECT Investigators. A prospective natural-history study of coronary atherosclerosis. N Engl J Med 2011; 364 (03) 226-235
• 19 Xaplanteris P, Fournier S, Pijls NHJ. et al.; FAME 2 Investigators. Five-year outcomes with PCI guided by fractional flow reserve. N Engl J Med 2018; 379 (03) 250-259
• 20 Spertus JA, Maron DJ, Cohen DJ. et al.; Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) Trial Investigators and Coordinators. Frequency, predictors, and consequences of crossing over to revascularization within 12 months of randomization to optimal medical therapy in the Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) trial. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2013; 6 (04) 409-418
• 21 Rajkumar CA, Foley MJ, Ahmed-Jushuf F. et al.; ORBITA-2 Investigators. A placebo-controlled trial of percutaneous coronary intervention for stable angina. N Engl J Med 2023; 389 (25) 2319-2330
• 22 Sedlis SP, Hartigan PM, Teo KK. et al.; COURAGE Trial Investigators. Effect of PCI on long-term survival in patients with stable ischemic heart disease. N Engl J Med 2015; 373 (20) 1937-1946
• 23 TIME Investigators. Trial of invasive versus medical therapy in elderly patients with chronic symptomatic coronary-artery disease (TIME): A randomised trial. Lancet 2001; 358 (9286): 951-957