Current Clinical Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

  • Mack M
  • Prince S
  • Herbert M
 et al. 
  • 1


    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • 27


    Citations of this article.


Background: Randomized trials have compared coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, results of these trials in select patients may not accurately reflect current clinical practice using drug-eluting stents (DES) and off-pump CABG. We undertook a prospective registry of coronary revascularization by CABG on-pump and off-pump, and PCI with or without DES, to determine clinical outcomes. Methods: All patients undergoing isolated coronary revascularization in 8 community-based hospitals were enrolled. Preprocedural, intraprocedural, and postprocedural data were captured, with outcomes obtained at 18 months by patient and physician contact, and the Social Security Death Index. Results: The study enrolled 4336 patients, 71.2% PCI and 28.8% CABG. DESs were used in 2249 PCIs (73.1%), and 596 CABG procedures (47.8%) were off-pump. Incidence of major adverse cardiac events at 18 months was 14.7% for CABG vs 23.3% for PCI (p < 0.001). Cardiac death and myocardial infarction had similar rates. The need for repeat revascularization was significantly less with CABG (6.2% vs 13.6%, p < 0.001). Hazard ratio of CABG to PCI was 0.76 (95% confidence interval, 0.571 to 0.872). CABG outcome was similar on-pump and off-pump, as was repeat revascularization with DES (12.1%) vs BMS (14.9%; p = 0.096). Overall event-free survival was 85.3% in CABG and 76.8% in PCI (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Rates of repeat revascularization were significantly higher for PCI than for CABG, but mortality and myocardial infarction were the same. There were no significant differences in outcomes between DES and BMS or between on-pump and off-pump CABG. © 2008 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons.

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document


Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free