The Future REvascularization Evaluation in patients with Diabetes mellitus: Optimal management of Multivessel disease (FREEDOM) trial: Clinical and angiographic profile at study entry.

Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY.
American heart journal (Impact Factor: 4.56). 10/2012; 164(4):591-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.06.012
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The optimal revascularization strategy for diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD) remains uncertain for lack of an adequately powered, randomized trial. The FREEDOM trial was designed to compare contemporary coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents in diabetic patients with MVD against a background of optimal medical therapy.
A total of 1,900 diabetic participants with MVD were randomized to PCI or CABG worldwide from April 2005 to March 2010. FREEDOM is a superiority trial with a mean follow-up of 4.37 years (minimum 2 years) and 80% power to detect a 27.0% relative reduction. We present the baseline characteristics of patients screened and randomized, and provide a comparison with other MVD trials involving diabetic patients.
The randomized cohort was 63.1 ± 9.1 years old and 29% female, with a median diabetes duration of 10.2 ± 8.9 years. Most (83%) had 3-vessel disease and on average took 5.5 ± 1.7 vascular medications, with 32% on insulin therapy. Nearly all had hypertension and/or dyslipidemia, and 26% had a prior myocardial infarction. Mean hemoglobin A1c was 7.8 ± 1.7 mg/dL, 29% had low-density lipoprotein <70 mg/dL, and mean systolic blood pressure was 134 ± 20 mm Hg. The mean SYNTAX score was 26.2 with a symmetric distribution. FREEDOM trial participants have baseline characteristics similar to those of contemporary multivessel and diabetes trial cohorts.
The FREEDOM trial has successfully recruited a high-risk diabetic MVD cohort. Follow-up efforts include aggressive monitoring to optimize background risk factor control. FREEDOM will contribute significantly to the PCI versus CABG debate in diabetic patients with MVD.


Available from: Lynn A Sleeper, Feb 23, 2014
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology 08/2014; 64(6):562–564. DOI:10.1016/j.jacc.2014.05.032 · 15.34 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite improving success rate of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic total occlusion (CTO) lesions, the clinical benefit of recanalization of CTO is still a matter of debate. Of 13,087 patients who underwent PCI in the CREDO-Kyoto registry cohort-2, 1,524 patients received PCI for CTO (CTO-PCI). Clinical outcomes were compared between 1,192 patients with successful CTO-PCI and 332 patients with failed CTO-PCI. In-hospital death tended to occur less frequently in the successful CTO-PCI group than in the failed CTO-PCI group (1.4% vs 3.0%, p = 0.053). Through 3-year follow-up, the cumulative incidence of all-cause death was not significantly different between the successful and failed CTO-PCI groups (9.0% vs 13.1%, p = 0.18), whereas the cumulative incidence of cardiac death was significantly less in the successful CTO-PCI group than in the failed CTO-PCI group (4.5% vs 8.4%, p = 0.03). However, after adjusting confounders, successful CTO-PCI was associated with lesser risk for neither all-cause death (hazard ratio 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.64 to 1.37, p = 0.69) nor cardiac death (hazard ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 1.16, p = 0.16). The cumulative incidence of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was remarkably less in patients with successful PCI compared with those with failed PCI (1.8% vs 19.6%, p <0.0001). In conclusion, successful CTO-PCI compared with failed PCI was not associated with lesser risk for 3-year mortality. However, successful CTO-PCI was associated with significantly less subsequent CABG. (c) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
    The American Journal of Cardiology 09/2013; 112(6). DOI:10.1016/j.amjcard.2013.05.004 · 3.43 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Inflammation and pain are two common clinical issues following cardiac surgery, which are important to patient outcomes. This article reviews the literature regarding inflammation and pain following cardiac surgery with special emphasis on off-pump cardiac surgery. Off-pump surgery is associated with decreased intraoperative inflammatory response compared with procedures using cardiopulmonary bypass; however, the postoperative pattern of inflammatory response is similar to on-pump procedures. Multimodal analgesic regimens and protocol-based approaches to pain management improve analgesia compared to conventional approaches. Off-pump cardiac surgeries although known to decrease the inflammatory burden do not appear to impact the overall patient outcomes. Recent evidence indicates the prothrombotic tendency following off-pump procedures, which could be related to the time course of inflammation following off-pump cardiac surgery. There might be some benefit of off-pump procedures regarding neurological and renal function that needs further studies. Pain management following off-pump procedures is similar to that of patients undergoing on-pump cardiac surgery. Better caregiver and patient education is crucial for improving pain control following cardiac surgery. Analgesic regimens need to consider adjuvants and regional analgesic techniques and patient-controlled modalities while providing care.
    Current opinion in anaesthesiology 12/2013; DOI:10.1097/ACO.0000000000000036 · 2.53 Impact Factor