Relative outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may differ between younger and older patients. There are no data comparing the age-related CABG versus PCI outcomes in the stent era.
The SoS trial compared CABG (n = 500) and stent-assisted PCI (n = 488). The impact of treatment assignment on 1-year outcomes was evaluated by age < or = 65 years (n = 295, CABG; n = 298, PCI) and > 65 years (n = 205, CABG; n = 190, PCI).
One-year procedural outcomes were similar between treatment groups regardless of age, with the exception of more repeat revascularizations after PCI (age < or = 65, 16.1% vs 4.8%; age > 65, 19.5% vs 3.4%; both P < .001). Six and 12-month Seattle Angina Questionnaire scores improved from baseline in both age and treatment groups. However, CABG was associated with greater improvement in physical limitation, angina frequency, and quality of life in younger patients at 6 and 12 months (12-month difference in improvement between CABG and PCI: 5.6, 4.8, and 3.9 points for 3 domains), whereas in the elderly a significant benefit of CABG observed at 6 months did not persist at 12 months (12-month difference: 0.9, 1.9, and 1.4). One-year costs were significantly higher after CABG regardless of age.
Although PCI and CABG result in similar rates in clinical outcomes irrespective of age, younger patients reported more health status benefits from CABG as compared with PCI, whereas in older patients the 2 approaches resulted in similar 1-year health status benefits.