Patient-Oriented Evidence That Matters

PCI Equal to Sham PCI for Exercise Tolerance in Patients with Stable Angina Plus Severe CAD


Am Fam Physician. 2018 Jul 1;98(1):55-56.

Clinical Question

Do patients with stable angina and severe coronary artery stenosis treated with percutaneous interventions (PCIs) have greater improvement in exercise tolerance than those treated with sham PCI?

Bottom Line

In patients with stable angina and severe coronary artery disease (CAD), PCI plus optimal medical treatment does not improve exercise tolerance or angina more than sham PCI plus optimal medical treatment. (Level of Evidence = 1b)


We have reported multiple studies for approximately 20 years that have shown that mortality and cardiac events are comparable for patients with stable angina who are treated medically, with PCI, or with bypass. These authors wanted to see if the exercise tolerance of patients with stable angina and severe coronary stenosis (at least 70% stenosis in one or more vessels) improved more with PCI compared with aggressive guideline-guided medical treatment. All patients completed a six-week medical optimization period followed by a prerandomization baseline assessment. The researchers then randomized patients to receive PCI (n = 105) or placebo intervention (catheterization without intervention). Including a sham intervention makes this study unique. All patients received dual antiplatelet therapy until the final assessment at six weeks after intervention. Four of the placebo-treated patients had a procedural complication that resulted in PCI but were analyzed in the placebo group. After six weeks, each group had a few seconds of increased exercise time but the difference in improvement was not significant. Additionally, there were no differences in physical limitation, angina frequency, or angina stability. Finally, the authors found no differences in quality of life.

Study design: Randomized controlled trial (double-blinded)

Funding source: Government

Allocation: Concealed

Setting: Outpatient (specialty)

Reference: Al-Lamee R, Thompson D, Dehbi HM, et al.; ORBITA investigators. Percutaneous coronary intervention in stable angina (ORBITA): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial [published correction appears in Lancet. 2018;391(10115):30]. Lancet. 2018;391(10115):31–40.

POEMs (patient-oriented evidence that matters) are provided by EssentialEvidence Plus, a point-of-care clinical decision support system published by Wiley-Blackwell. For more information, please see http://www.essentialevidenceplus.com. Copyright Wiley-Blackwell. Used with permission.

For definitions of levels of evidence used in POEMs, see https://www.essentialevidenceplus.com/product/ebm_loe.cfm?show=oxford.

To subscribe to a free podcast of these and other POEMs that appear in AFP, search in iTunes for “POEM of the Week” or go to http://goo.gl/3niWXb.

This series is coordinated by Sumi Sexton, MD, Editor-in-Chief.

A collection of POEMs published in AFP is available at https://www.aafp.org/afp/poems.



Want to use this article elsewhere? Get Permissions

More in AFP

Editor's Collections

Related Content

More in Pubmed


Sep 2021

Access the latest issue of American Family Physician

Read the Issue

Email Alerts

Don't miss a single issue. Sign up for the free AFP email table of contents.

Sign Up Now

Navigate this Article