Late Survival Benefit of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Compared With Medical Therapy in Patients With Coronary Chronic Total Occlusion: A 10‐Year Follow‐Up Study

Abstract

Background As an initial treatment strategy, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) did not show midterm survival benefits compared with optimal medical therapy (OMT). We sought to evaluate the benefit of PCI compared with OMT in patients with CTO over extended long‐term follow‐up. Methods and Results Between March 2003 and February 2012, 2024 patients with CTO were enrolled in a single‐center registry and followed for ≈10 years. We excluded patients with CTO who underwent coronary artery bypass graft (n=477) and classified patients into the CTO‐PCI group (n=883) or OMT group (n=664) according to initial treatment strategy. Patients with multivessel disease received PCI for obstructive non‐CTO lesions in both groups. In the CTO‐PCI group, 699 patients (79.2%) underwent successful revascularization. The CTO‐PCI group had a lower 10‐year rate of cardiac death (10.4% versus 22.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.44 [95% CI, 0.32–0.59]; P<0.001) than the OMT group. After propensity score matching analyses, the CTO‐PCI group had a lower 10‐year rate of cardiac death (13.6% versus 20.8%; HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.45–0.91]; P=0.01) than the OMT group. The relative reduction in cardiac death at 10 years was mainly driven by a relative reduction between 3 and 10 years (8.3% versus 16.6%; HR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.27–0.71]; P<0.001) but not at 3 years (5.7% versus 5.0%; HR, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.63–2.00]; P=0.71). The beneficial effects of CTO‐PCI were consistent among subgroups. Conclusions As an initial treatment strategy, CTO‐PCI might reduce late cardiac death compared with OMT in patients with CTO. Extended follow‐up of randomized trials may confirm the findings of the present study.

Keywords

• chronic total occlusion
• medical therapy
• percutaneous coronary intervention