Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Preventive percutaneous coronary intervention for non-flow-limiting vulnerable atherosclerotic coronary plaques in diabetes: The PREVENT trial

  • Min Chul Kim
  • , Seung Jung Park
  • , Duk Woo Park
  • , Jung Min Ahn
  • , Do Yoon Kang
  • , Won Jang Kim
  • , Chang Wook Nam
  • , Jin Ok Jeong
  • , In Ho Chae
  • , Hiroki Shiomi
  • , Hsien Li Kao
  • , Joo Yong Hahn
  • , Sung Ho Her
  • , Bong Ki Lee
  • , Tae Hoon Ahn
  • , Kiyuk Chang
  • , Jei Keon Chae
  • , David Smyth
  • , Gary S. Mintz
  • , Gregg W. Stone
  • Youngkeun Ahn
  • Chonnam National University
  • University of Ulsan
  • CHA University
  • Keimyung University
  • Chungnam National University
  • Seoul National University
  • Kyoto University
  • National Taiwan University
  • The Catholic University of Korea
  • Kangwon National University
  • Na-Eun Hospital
  • Jeonbuk National University
  • Canterbury District Health Board
  • Cardiovascular Research Foundation
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background and Aims The efficacy and safety of preventive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for treating vulnerable plaques in diabetic patients remain unclear. Methods The PREVENT (Preventive Coronary Intervention on Stenosis with Functionally Insignificant Vulnerable Plaque) trial was a randomized clinical trial that compared preventive PCI plus optimal medical therapy with optimal medical therapy alone in patients with non-flow-limiting (fractional flow reserve >0.80) vulnerable plaques identified via intracoronary imaging. Randomization was stratified by diabetes status. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, ischaemia-driven target-vessel revascularisation, or hospitalization for unstable or progressive angina at 2 years. Results Among 1606 randomized patients, 490 (30.5%) had diabetes. Diabetic patients underwent PCI for non-target lesions before randomization more frequently than non-diabetics (40.6% vs. 33.8%, P =. 009). There were no significant differences in the incidence of the primary endpoint between diabetic and non-diabetic patients [1.8% vs. 1.9%; hazard ratio 0.98; 95% confidence interval 0.45-2.14); P =. 956]. However, the primary endpoint at 2 years was less frequent with preventive PCI compared with optimal medical therapy alone in both diabetic (0% vs. 3.7%; P =. 004) and non-diabetic patients (0.5% vs. 3.2%; hazard ratio 0.16; 95% confidence interval 0.05-0.55; P =. 004), without a significant interaction between diabetic status and randomized strategy. Conclusions The risk of adverse clinical events was similar between diabetic and non-diabetic patients with non-flow-limiting vulnerable coronary plaques. However, preventive PCI was associated with a lower incidence of the primary endpoint at 2 years, regardless of diabetes status.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3181-3197
Number of pages17
JournalEuropean Heart Journal
Volume46
Issue number32
DOIs
StatePublished - 21 Aug 2025

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • Diabetes mellitus
  • Fractional flow reserve
  • Percutaneous coronary intervention
  • Vulnerable coronary plaques

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Preventive percutaneous coronary intervention for non-flow-limiting vulnerable atherosclerotic coronary plaques in diabetes: The PREVENT trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this