Coronary disease & ACSSecondary analysis
Routine stress testing in diabetic patients after percutaneous coronary intervention: the POST-PCI trial
- Secondary analysis of the POST-PCI randomised trial
- randomisation stratified by diabetes status
Authors' conclusion
Despite being at higher risk for adverse clinical events, patients with diabetes who had undergone high-risk PCI did not derive incremental benefit from routine surveillance stress testing compared with standard care alone during follow-up.
Study context
- Population
- High-risk patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), with and without diabetes660 with diabetes
- Participants
- 1,706 patients
- Comparison
- Routine functional testing vs Standard care
- Primary endpoint
- Composite of:
- All-cause death
- MI
- Hospitalization for unstable angina
- Follow-up
- 2 years
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
Primary composite outcome, by diabetes status (subgroups)
Routine functional testing vs Standard careHazard ratio (95% CI)P value
diabetes: 7.1% vs 7.5%
0.94(0.53–1.66)
P = 0.82no diabetes: 4.6% vs 5.1%
0.89(0.51–1.55)
P = 0.68Further findings
| Outcome | HR (95% CI) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary composite outcome, diabetes vs no diabetes | 1.52 (1.02–2.27) | P = 0.039 | |
| 0.512Hazard ratio (log scale) |
Invasive coronary angiography and repeat revascularization after 1 year
- Higher with routine functional testing than standard care irrespective of diabetes status
Original publication
Routine stress testing in diabetic patients after percutaneous coronary intervention: the POST-PCI trial. Eur Heart J. Published 2 November 2023. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehad722
Summarised from the published abstract; every number is checked against it