open access
Optimal revascularization in diabetes after the FREEDOM trial: Were the controversies finally settled?
open access
Abstract
states, in adjunct to endothelial dysfunction and metabolic disorders, such as hyperglycemia,
dyslipidemia, obesity, insulin resistance, and oxidative stress, are key features of the
accelerated atherosclerotic progression observed in patients with DM. Moreover, drug-eluting
stents (DES) thrombosis rate was higher in DM than in non-DM patients and DM itself was
identifi ed as an independent predictor of stent thrombosis, particularly due to the impaired
response to dual antiplatelet therapy. The accumulating data even before the FREEDOM trial
provided strong evidence that in patients with DM and complex coronary artery disease, coronary
artery bypass grafting (CABG) was superior to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)
which was based on the fi rst-generation DES. The FREEDOM trial enrolled 1900 patients
with DM and multivessel coronary artery disease treated with CABG surgery or PCI with the
fi rst-generation DES. The patients were followed for a median 3.8 years; CABG was superior
to PCI as it signifi cantly reduced rates of death and myocardial infarction (MI), with a higher
rate of stroke. The benefi t of CABG was driven by differences in rates of both MI (p < 0.001)
and death from any cause (p = 0.049). Following the FREEDOM results, patients with DM
ought to be informed before coronary angiography about the potential survival benefi t from
CABG for the treatment of a complex disease. However, it should be noticed that the second generation
DES were associated with better outcomes compared to the fi rst-generation DES. New
stent designs are continually being developed, with the aim of further improving the clinical
effi cacy and the safety profi le of these devices. Therefore, although the results of the FREEDOM
trial clearly demonstrated that CABG was superior to PCI in DM, a comparative analysis of
the new incoming stents warrants further investigation.
Abstract
states, in adjunct to endothelial dysfunction and metabolic disorders, such as hyperglycemia,
dyslipidemia, obesity, insulin resistance, and oxidative stress, are key features of the
accelerated atherosclerotic progression observed in patients with DM. Moreover, drug-eluting
stents (DES) thrombosis rate was higher in DM than in non-DM patients and DM itself was
identifi ed as an independent predictor of stent thrombosis, particularly due to the impaired
response to dual antiplatelet therapy. The accumulating data even before the FREEDOM trial
provided strong evidence that in patients with DM and complex coronary artery disease, coronary
artery bypass grafting (CABG) was superior to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)
which was based on the fi rst-generation DES. The FREEDOM trial enrolled 1900 patients
with DM and multivessel coronary artery disease treated with CABG surgery or PCI with the
fi rst-generation DES. The patients were followed for a median 3.8 years; CABG was superior
to PCI as it signifi cantly reduced rates of death and myocardial infarction (MI), with a higher
rate of stroke. The benefi t of CABG was driven by differences in rates of both MI (p < 0.001)
and death from any cause (p = 0.049). Following the FREEDOM results, patients with DM
ought to be informed before coronary angiography about the potential survival benefi t from
CABG for the treatment of a complex disease. However, it should be noticed that the second generation
DES were associated with better outcomes compared to the fi rst-generation DES. New
stent designs are continually being developed, with the aim of further improving the clinical
effi cacy and the safety profi le of these devices. Therefore, although the results of the FREEDOM
trial clearly demonstrated that CABG was superior to PCI in DM, a comparative analysis of
the new incoming stents warrants further investigation.
Keywords
Coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus


Title
Optimal revascularization in diabetes after the FREEDOM trial: Were the controversies finally settled?
Journal
Issue
Article type
Review Article
Pages
331-336
Published online
2013-07-26
Page views
2145
Article views/downloads
2411
DOI
10.5603/CJ.2013.0090
Bibliographic record
Cardiol J 2013;20(4):331-336.
Keywords
Coronary artery disease
diabetes mellitus
Authors
Alexander Tenenbaum
Enrique Fisman