Department of Cardiac Surgery, Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China (mainland).
Med Sci Monit. 2020 Feb 25;26:e919374. doi: 10.12659/MSM.919374.
BACKGROUND Surgical treatment methods for patients with complex coronary artery disease (CAD) who have undergone vascular reconstruction mainly include coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The purpose of the study aimed to compare a 1-year follow-up for the patient clinical outcomes and costs between PCI and CABG treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS There were 840 patients enrolled in this study from July 2015 to September 2016. Among the study participants, 420 patients underwent PCI treatment and 420 patients underwent off-pump CABG. Patients costs were assessed from the perspective of the China healthcare and medical insurance system. EuroQOL 5-dimension 3 levels (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire was used to evaluate the general health status, and the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) was used to assess the disease-specific health status. RESULTS After a 1-year follow-up, the all-cause mortality (P=0.0337), the incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (P<0.001), and additional revascularization (P<0.001) in PCI group were significantly higher than those in CABG group. Both groups have significant sustained benefits in the SAQ subscale. The CABG group had a higher score on the frequency of angina than the PCI group. In addition, the quality-adjusted life year value of PCI and CABG resulted was 0.8. The average total cost for PCI was $14 643 versus CABG cost of $13 842 (P=0.0492). CONCLUSIONS In the short-term, among the CAD patients with stable triple-vessel or left-main, costs and clinical outcomes are substantially higher for CABG than PCI. Long-term, economic, and health benefits analysis, is warranted.
对于接受过血管重建的复杂冠状动脉疾病(CAD)患者,外科治疗方法主要包括冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)和经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)。本研究旨在比较 PCI 和 CABG 治疗后患者 1 年的临床结果和成本。
本研究共纳入 2015 年 7 月至 2016 年 9 月的 840 例患者。其中 420 例患者接受 PCI 治疗,420 例患者接受非体外循环 CABG。患者成本从中国医疗保健和医疗保险系统的角度进行评估。采用欧洲五维健康量表 3 级(EQ-5D-3L)问卷评估一般健康状况,西雅图心绞痛问卷(SAQ)评估疾病特异性健康状况。
1 年后随访时,PCI 组全因死亡率(P=0.0337)、主要不良心脏和脑血管事件发生率(P<0.001)和再次血运重建率(P<0.001)明显高于 CABG 组。两组在 SAQ 亚量表中均有显著的持续获益。CABG 组心绞痛发作频率得分高于 PCI 组。此外,PCI 和 CABG 的质量调整生命年(QALY)值分别为 0.8。PCI 的平均总费用为 14643 美元,而 CABG 的费用为 13842 美元(P=0.0492)。
在短期,对于稳定的三支血管或左主干 CAD 患者,CABG 的成本和临床结果明显高于 PCI。需要进行长期的经济和健康效益分析。