Mortality is substantially lower in patients undergoing coronary bypass grafting vs percutaneous coronary intervention with three-vessel coronary disease and cardiogenic shock in the setting of non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction
Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Background
Optimal revascularization strategy in patients with cardiogenic shock and three-vessel coronary disease presenting with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is not well established. The goal of this study was to use the largest inpatient database to evaluate inpatient mortality of NSTEMI patients with three-vessel disease and cardiogenic shock undergoing coronary bypass surgery (CABG) vs percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
Method
Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database, and ICD-10 coding for NSTEMI, cardiogenic shock, three-vessel CABG, and three-vessel PCI, we evaluate total inpatient mortality comparing three-vessel CABG vs three-vessel PCI in adults over age 18 years.
Results
A total of 2,805 NSTEMI patients with 3-vessel disease and cardiogenic shock underwent PCI vs.7,585 undergoing CABG. CABG in the setting of NSTEMI-related cardiogenic shock and three-vessel CAD is associated with much lower mortality compared to three-vessel PCI despite multivariate adjustment. Mortality was more than twice in patients undergoing PCI vs CABG (Mortality 25.31% vs 11.22%, P<0.001, OR for CABG patients: 0.37, CI: 0.29-0.48, P<0.001). After adjusting baseline characteristics and comorbidities in multivariate analysis, CABG remained significantly associated with lower mortality (CABG OR 0.41, CI: 0.31-0.54, p<0.001).
Conclusion
Our data suggests that three-vessel CABG is greatly superior to PCI in NSTEMI patients presenting with cardiogenic shock and three-vessel coronary artery disease.
