The benefits of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) over medical therapy have been well demonstrated in a broad spectrum of patients with acute ischaemic syndromes.1 Recent analyses of PCI versus medical therapy showed similar efficacy in regard to long-term mortality or myocardial infarction (MI) between these two strategies in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD).2 Wijeysundera and colleagues have systematically evaluated the evidence comparing the effects of PCI versus medical therapy on the relief of angina in stable CAD. Two independent authors have identified 14 randomised controlled trials of PCI versus medical therapy in patients with stable CAD through the Cochrane Library (1993 to June 2009), EMBASE (1980 to June 2009) or MEDLINE (1950 to June 2009) searches. A comprehensive meta-analysis was performed using the random effects model based on the Der-Simonian and Laird method to combine data on freedom from angina. Stratified analyses were performed based on duration of follow-up, inclusion of patients with recent MI, coronary …