In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.
Did you know that your browser is out of date? To get the best experience using our website we recommend that you upgrade to a newer version. Learn more.

We use cookies to optimise the design of this website and make continuous improvement. By continuing your visit, you consent to the use of cookies. Learn more

Coronary Artery Revascularisation in Diabetes. The CARDia trial.

Hot Line II

Diabetes and the Heart

Presenter report:

Kapur, Akhil (United Kingdom)


The CARDia trial (Coronary Artery Revascularisation in Diabetes – 510 patients) is the largest randomised trial specifically comparing coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with diabetes and multivessel disease to date.  The BARI trial (which recruited patients from 1987 to 1991) had a subset of 353 diabetic  patients and suggested that CABG patients had improved survival compared to angioplasty, a finding which has guided practice since then.

Preliminary results of the CARDia trial at one year show no apparent difference between CABG and PCI  in terms of the composite endpoints of death, non fatal MI and non fatal stroke (10.2% vs. 11.6%, p=0.63). Comparison of the individual endpoints of CABG vs. PCI were as follows: death (3.3% vs. 3.2%, p=0.83), non fatal MI (5.7% vs. 8.4%, p= 0.25) and non fatal stroke (2.5% vs. 0.4%, p=0.09).  Repeat revascularisation was higher in the PCI group as expected with a rate of 9.9% vs. 2.0% for CABG.  Comparing CABG and a subgroup of 179 PCI patients who received drug eluting Cypher stents rather than bare metal stents, the composite endpoint of death, non fatal MI and non fatal stroke was 10.2% vs. 10.1% (p=0.98) again showing no difference in this composite endpoint.

CARDia shows that at 1 year, there is no apparent difference between CABG and PCI in terms of death or the composite of death, non fatal MI and non fatal stroke and suggests that PCI is a safe alternative to CABG in selected patients with diabetes and multi-vessel coronary artery disease.  “We are very excited about these results.  For the first time we have evidence from a randomised trial using modern treatments that PCI may offer safe coronary revascularisation in diabetic patients compared to surgery.” said Akhil Kapur, Study Director and presenter at the hotline clinical trials session at the ESC Congress in Munich on September 1st 2008.

 Discussant: Fuster Valentin (United States of America)





Hot Line Update II

Notes to editor

This congress report accompanies a presentation given at the ESC Congress 2008. Written by the author himself/herself, this report does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Society of Cardiology.


The content of this article reflects the personal opinion of the author/s and is not necessarily the official position of the European Society of Cardiology.