Key result
Coronary artery bypass grafting in octogenarians was associated with a significantly higher 6-year survival rate (90.2%) compared to percutaneous coronary intervention (72.5%, p=0.004) and medical treatment (80.0%, p=0.001).
Why the study?
CABG in octogenarians is perceived as high risk due to advanced age, but the effects of CABG, PCI, and medical therapy on survival have not been adequately assessed.
Does CABG improve survival compared to PCI or medical treatment in octogenarian patients with coronary artery disease?
Cohort (n=375)
No
Does CABG improve survival compared to PCI or medical treatment in octogenarian patients with coronary artery disease?
Absolute Event Rate: 90.2% vs 72.5%
p-value: p=0.004
In octogenarians with coronary artery disease, CABG was associated with better 6-year survival compared to PCI or medical therapy.
May favor CABG in select octogenarians; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized confirmation before practice change.
Aims: Best popular perception that coronary artery bypass grefting in octogenarians carries high risk related primarily to advanced age. Nevertheless, the effects of CABG, percutaneous coronary intervention , and medical treatment were not assessed on life adequately. Material and Methods: In the present study, survival duration of 375 octogenarian patients who underwent coronary angiography (CAG) in our clinic was evaluated retrospectively. Results: Patients were assigned and compare to seven groups as follows: group 1, patients with normal CAG results; group 2, patients with diffuse coronary narrowness who received medical treatment, group 3, patients who underwent PCI, group 4 was the subgroup of patients from group 3 who underwent PCI in the left anterior descending artery only or in combination with their coronary arteries; group 5, patients in critical condition who were unavailable for any intervention because of cardiac function, group 6, patients who underwent CABG; and group 7, patients who declined the recommended CABG and PCI. For each group, the first-year survival rates were respectively: 100%, 95%, 91.2%, 91.8%, 76.1%, 93.0%, 90.82%. After 6 years, the survival rates were respectively: 76.1%, 80.0%, 72.5%, 71.42%, 52.3%, 90.2%, 76.14%. Rates of patients living by years a significant correlation was revealed between group 6 and group 2 and group 3 (p=0.001, p = 0.004). Group 3 was found to have a significant correlation with Group 4 and Group 7 (p=.000). Group 7 was significantly correlated with groups 3 (p = 0.000), 4 (p = 0.000), and 2 (p = 0.007). Conclusion: Especially in octogenarians who had shortness of the expected survival, the surgical advantage of visual anastomotic replacement, and complete vascularization were successed more than PCI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hasan Hakan Atalay (2021) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease (n=375). Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was evaluated on 6-year survival rate (p=0.004). Coronary artery bypass grafting in octogenarians was associated with a significantly higher 6-year survival rate (90.2%) compared to percutaneous coronary intervention (72.5%, p=0.004) and medical treatment (80.0%, p=0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: