Key result
Compared to PCI, exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation was associated with significantly lower odds of 18-month all-cause mortality (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.29-0.47) in patients with chronic coronary syndrome.
Why the study?
Accumulating evidence questions the clinical value of PCI for patients with CCS, prompting a comparison with exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation.
Does exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation reduce 18-month mortality and morbidity compared to percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with chronic coronary syndrome?
Cohort (n=18,383)
Yes
Does exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation reduce 18-month mortality and morbidity compared to percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with chronic coronary syndrome?
Odds Ratio: 0.37 (95% CI 0.29–0.47)
Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation is associated with lower 18-month mortality and morbidity compared to PCI in patients with chronic coronary syndrome.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Should not yet change PCI preference in chronic coronary syndrome; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation.
Buckley et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) (n=18,383). Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation vs. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was evaluated on 18-month all-cause mortality (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.29-0.47). Compared to PCI, exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation was associated with significantly lower odds of 18-month all-cause mortality (OR 0.37; 95% CI 0.29-0.47) in patients with chronic coronary syndrome.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: