Abstract
Introduction: There is limited data on the benefits of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in very elderly patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG). Therefore, we sought to evaluate the outcomes of PCI versus medical therapy alone in very elderly patients with prior CABG who present with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods: Retrospective study of patients ≥ 80 years old with prior CABG who underwent invasive coronary angiography for AMI at Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center between June 2009 and February 2019. Patients were treated with PCI or medical therapy alone. Inverse Probability Treatment of Weighting (IPTW) was used to balance baseline characteristics between treatment groups and cox proportional hazard regression analysis was utilized. Outcomes evaluated were all-cause mortality and non-fatal MI. Results: There were 347 patients (average age 83.6±3.2 years, 18% female) analyzed. Of these 167 (48%) underwent PCI. Compared to medical therapy alone, the PCI group was more likely to have left main disease (15% vs 2.8%, p<0.01) and higher ejection fraction (48.0± vs 44.4± %, p=0.02); but less likely to have history of atrial fibrillation (31.7% vs 45.6%, p<0.01). To adjust for significant differences between groups, IPTW was utilized to balance covariates (all p>0.05). At a median follow-up of 27.6 months (interquartile range 9.7-52 months), there were no significant differences in all-cause mortality (Hazard Ratio [HR] 0.93, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.88-1.32, p=0.5), and non-fatal MI (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72-1.26, p=0.7). Conclusion: PCI did not improve clinical outcomes over medical therapy alone in very elderly patients ≥ 80 years of age with prior CABG presenting with AMI. Further studies are needed to delineate the role of PCI in this high-risk unique population.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call