Comparison of the survival between coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with poor left ventricular function (ejection fraction <30%): a propensity-matched analysis

Abstract

OBJECTIVES\nExisting evidence comparing the outcomes of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with poor left ventricular function (LVF) is sparse and flawed. This is largely due to patients with poor LVF being underrepresented in major research trials and the outdated nature of some studies that do not consider drug-eluting stent PCI.\n\n\nMETHODS\nFollowing strict inclusion criteria, 717 patients who underwent revascularization by CABG or PCI between 2002 and 2015 were enrolled. All patients had poor LVF (defined by ejection fraction <30%). By employing a propensity score analysis, 134 suitable matches (67 CABG and 67 PCI) were identified. Several outcomes were evaluated, in the matched population, using data extracted from national registry databases.\n\n\nRESULTS\nCABG patients required a longer length of hospital stay post-revascularization compared to PCI in the propensity-matched population, 7\u2009days (lower-upper quartile; 6-12) and 2\u2009days (lower-upper quartile; 1-6), respectively (Mood s median test, P\u2009=\u20090.001). Stratified Cox-regression proportional-hazards analysis of the propensity-matched population found that PCI patients experienced a higher adjusted 8-year mortality rate (hazard ratio 3.291, 95% confidence interval 1.776-6.101; P\u2009<\u20090.001). This trend was consistent amongst urgent cases of revascularization: patients with 3 or more vessels with coronary artery disease and patients where complete revascularization was achieved. Although sub-analyses found no difference between survival distributions of on-pump versus off-pump CABG (log-rank P\u2009=\u20090.726), both modes of CABG were superior to PCI (stratified log-rank P\u2009=\u20090.002).\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nDespite a longer length of hospital stay, patients with impaired LVF requiring intervention for coronary artery disease experienced a greater post-procedural survival benefit if they received CABG compared to PCI. We have demonstrated this at 30\u2009days, 90\u2009days, 1\u2009year, 3\u2009years, 5\u2009years and 8\u2009years following revascularization. At present, CABG remains a superior revascularization modality to PCI in patients with poor LVF.