Quality of Life After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

Abstract

Background Differences in quality of life (QoL) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are not well characterized. We aimed to compare the short‐ and long‐term effects of CABG versus PCI on QoL. Methods and Results We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing CABG versus PCI using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ)‐Angina Frequency, SAQ‐QoL, SAQ‐Physical Limitations, EuroQoL‐5D, and Short‐Form Questionnaire. We calculated mean changes within each group from baseline to 1, 6, 12, and 36 to 60 months (latest follow‐up) and the weighted mean differences between groups using inverse‐variance methods. A total of 10 760 patients were enrolled in 5 trials. From baseline to 12 months and 36 to 60 months, the mean change in SAQ‐Angina Frequency was >22 points (95% CI, 21.0–25.6) after both PCI and CABG. The mean difference in SAQ‐Angina Frequency was similar between procedures at 1 month and at 36 to 60 months but favored CABG at 12 months (1.97 [95% CI, 0.68–3.26]). SAQ‐QoL favored PCI at 1 month (−2.92 [95% CI, −4.66 to −1.18]) and CABG at 6 (2.50 [95% CI, 1.02–3.97]), 12 (3.30 [95% CI, 1.78–4.82]), and 36 to 60 months (3.17 [95% CI, 0.54 5.80). SAQ‐Physical Limitations (−12.61 [95% CI, −16.16 to −9.06]) and EuroQoL‐5D (−0.07 [95% CI, −0.08 to −0.07) favored PCI at 1 month. Short‐Form Questionnaire‐Physical Component favored CABG at 12 months (1.18 [95% CI, 0.46–1.90]). Conclusions Both PCI and CABG improved long‐term disease‐specific and generic QoL.

Keywords

• coronary artery bypass grafting
• coronary artery disease
• percutaneous coronary intervention