Outcomes of DES in Diabetic and Nondiabetic Patients with Complex Coronary Artery Disease after Risk Stratification by the SYNTAX Score

Diabetes mellitus (DM) increases the risk of adverse outcomes after coronary revascularization. Controversy persists regarding the optimal revascularization strategy for diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD). Aim The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes of drug-eluting stent (DES) insertion in DM and non-DM patients with complex coronary artery disease (CAD) after risk stratification by the percutaneous coronary intervention with taxus and cardiac surgery (SYNTAX) score. Methods and Results We performed multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for 601 lesions in 243 DM patients and 1,029 lesions in 401 non-DM patients. All included patients had MVD and one or more lesions of type B2/C. The two-year outcomes and event rates were estimated in the DM and non-DM patients using Kaplan–Meier analyses. The baseline SYNTAX score was ≤22 in 84.8% vs. 84%, P = 0.804, and 23-32 in 15.2% vs. 16%, P = 0.804, of the DM and non-DM patients, respectively. The number of diseased segments treated (2.57 ± 0.75 vs. 2.47 ± 0.72; P = 0.066) and stents implanted per patient (2.41 ± 0.63 vs. 2.32 ± 0.54; P = 0.134) were similar in both groups. After a mean follow-up of 642 ± 175 days, there were no differences in the major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; 26.7% vs. 20.9%; P = 0.091), composite end point of all-cause death/myocardial infarction (MI)/stroke (12.3% vs. 9%; P = 0.172), individual MACCE components of death (3.7% vs. 3.2%; P = 0.754), MI (6.6% vs. 4%; P = 0.142), and absence of stroke in the DM and non-DM patients. An increased need for repeat revascularization was observed in DM patients (18.5% vs. 10.2%; P = 0.003). In the multivariate analysis, DM was an independent predictor of repeat revascularization (hazard ratio: 1.818; 95% confidence interval: 1.162-2.843; P = 0.009). Conclusions DES implantation provides favorable early and mid-term results in both DM and non-DM patients undergoing PCI for complex lesions. After a mean follow-up of two years, DM and non-DM patients with complex CAD treated by PCI using new-generation DES showed no differences with regard to MACCE and other secondary end points. However, higher rates of ischemia-driven repeat revascularization were observed in DM patients.