Quality of Life After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in No-Touch Saphenous Vein Grafts is Significantly Better Than in Conventional Vein Grafts

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients primarily treated with a no-touch saphenous vein graft with that of patients who received a conventional graft. Methods: The study included all individuals treated with a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on a saphenous vein graft (SVG) between January 2006 and June 2020. The RAND-36 health survey was used to assess HRQoL. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to test differences in HRQoL between the two groups. Effect size was estimated via Cohen’s d. The average treatment effect between the groups was tested by propensity score matching (PSM). Results: Of the 346 patients treated with a PCI in a stenosed or occluded SVG, 165 responded to RAND-36 (no-touch: n=48; conventional: n=117). Patients with a no-touch graft reported better mean values on seven of the eight health survey domains. Statistically significant differences were observed for four of the domains, all in favour of the no-touch group. The effect size estimates indicated a small difference for five domains, with the highest values (>0.40) seen for the general health and energy/fatigue domains. PSM confirmed a statistically significant difference for the physical functioning and general health domains. Conclusion: At a mean follow-up of 5.4 years, patients who received a PCI in no-touch vein grafts showed significantly better HRQoL than those who received a PCI in conventional vein grafts.

Keywords

• Coronary Artery Bypass
• Quality of Life
• Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
• Saphenous Vein
• Fatigue
• Propensity Score.