An OR of 1 suggests an advantage of CABG over PCI. ARTS I indicates Arterial Revascularization Therapy Study I185; BARI I, Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investiga- tion I74; CABG, coronary artery bypass graft; CAD, coronary artery disease; CARDia, Coronary Artery Revascularization in Diabetes186; CI, confidence interval; MASS II, Medicine, Angioplasty, or Surgery Study II78; OR, odds ratio; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; SYNTAX, Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery; and W, weighted.76 Levine et al 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI PCI Guideline e587 2.9.4. LV Systolic Dysfunction Several older studies and a meta-analysis of the data from these studies reported that patients with LV systolic dys- function (predominantly mild to moderate in severity) had better survival with CABG than with medical therapy alone.30,64 68 For patients with more severe LV systolic dysfunction, however, the evidence that CABG results in better survival compared with medical therapy is lacking. In the STICH (Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure) trial of subjects with LVEF 35% with or without viability testing, CABG and GDMT resulted in similar rates of survival (death from any cause, the study s primary outcome) after 5 years of follow-up. For a number of secondary outcomes at this time point, including 1) death from any cause or hospitalization for heart failure, 2) death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes, 3) death from any cause or hospitalization for any cause, or 4) death from any cause or revascularization with PCI or CABG, CABG was superior to GDMT. 