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: 4.46). 10/2012; 164(4):591-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2012.06.012
Source: PubMed


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.

Download full-text


Available from: Lynn A Sleeper, Feb 23, 2014
  • Source

    Full-text · Article · Feb 2013 · Indian Heart Journal
  • 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.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2013 · The American Journal of Cardiology
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Arterial grafting is superior to venous grafting in coronary artery bypass graft surgery with respect to graft patency and long-term patient outcome, but it may be difficult to achieve complete arterial revascularization. Use of arterial grafts, especially bilateral internal mammary artery grafts, is not common, whereas there are clear indications that it may increase survival. Definitions of complete revascularization are varied and confusing, making study comparisons difficult. Technical challenges in complete revascularization with arterial grafts can be minimized by surgical techniques. Competitive flow in moderately stenosed coronary arteries grafted with arterial conduits may result in reduced patency. While internal mammary arteries may be used in arteries with at least 60% stenosis, radial artery and gastroepiploic grafts are best placed onto coronaries with severe stenosis. Moderate lesions in the left coronary circulation should be bypassed, but right coronary artery lesions can be left untouched as there is minimal progression over time. Complete revascularization may not be necessary or possible in every patient because of technical challenges. Complete revascularization with arterial grafts presents both technical and physiological challenges. However, with techniques to maximize length of arterial conduits, knowledge of competitive flow and which moderate lesions should be addressed, complete revascularization with arterial grafts can be accomplished in the majority of patients, notwithstanding it may not be possible or even indicated for every patient.
    Full-text · Article · Sep 2013 · Current opinion in cardiology
Show more