Five-Year Follow-Up of the Argentine Randomized Trial of Coronary Angioplasty With Stenting Versus Coronary Bypass Surgery in Patients With Multiple Vessel Disease (ERACI II)
Alfredo E. Rodriguez, MD, PhD, FACC*,
Julio Baldi, MD, PhD*,
Carlos Fernández Pereira, MD*,
Jose Navia, MD*,
Máximo Rodriguez Alemparte, MD*,
Alejandro Delacasa, MD
,
Federico Vigo, MD*,
Daniel Vogel, MD*,
William O'Neill, MD, FACC
,
Igor F. Palacios, MD, FACC,
,* on behalf of the ERACI II Investigators
* Otamendi Hospital, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Sanatorio Belgrano, Mar del Plata, Argentina
William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan
Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts

View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 1 Comparison of survival of patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
|
|

View larger version (11K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 2 Comparison of non-fatal myocardial infarction of patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
|
|

View larger version (10K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 3 Comparison of repeat revascularization procedures (percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI] or coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]) of patients treated with CABG (square symbols) versus PCI (round symbols).
|
|

View larger version (10K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 5 Comparison of freedom from major adverse cardiovascular events (alive and free of non-fatal myocardial infarction or stroke or repeat revascularization procedures) of patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting (square symbols) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (round symbols).
|
|

View larger version (28K):
[in a new window]
|
Figure 4 Comparison of freedom from angina between patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting (solid bars) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (gray bars).
|
|
Copyright © 2005 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.