Intravascular Imaging-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) vs Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Left Main or 3-Vessel Disease
Pooled resultResult — go to the resultHazard ratio 0.77 95% CI 0.59–1.01Authors' conclusion
In this hypothesis-generating study, PCI had significantly higher risk of a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or stroke than CABG. However, IVI-guided PCI had comparable risk of clinical events compared with CABG.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with left main or 3-vessel disease (RENOVATE-COMPLEX-PCI trial and Samsung Medical Center registry)
- Participants
- 6,962 patients
- Comparison
- Intravascular imaging (IVI)-guided PCI vs coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)
- IVI-guided PCIn = 848
- Angiography-guided PCIn = 987
- CABGn = 5,127reference
- Outcome
- Composite of:
- All-cause death
- Nonfatal MI
- Stroke
- Follow-up
- 3 years
Methodological detailspropensity score-matched analysis, hypothesis-generating
- Propensity score-matched analysis
- Hypothesis-generating
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Hazard ratio
0.77
95% CI 0.59–1.01
P = 0.058
By group
IVI-guided PCI vs CABG
HR 0.77 (95% CI 0.59–1.01); P = 0.058
Further pooled results
| Outcome | IVI-guided PCI | Angiography-guided PCI | CABG | HR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary outcome, all PCI vs CABG | 1.23 (1.05–1.44) | P = 0.013 | ||||
| Primary outcome, IVI-guided PCI vs CABG (propensity score-matched)Propensity score-matched | 9.5% | Not reported in the abstract | 9.4% | 0.98 (0.69–1.40) | P = 0.914 | Angiography-guided PCI: not reported in the abstract |
| 0.512Hazard ratio (log scale) |
- Primary outcome, all PCI vs CABG: PCI 13.3%
Original publication
Intravascular Imaging-Guided PCI vs Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Left Main or 3-Vessel Disease. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. Published 27 August 2025. doi:10.
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it