Evaluate the Quality of Life in Patients With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Graft

Abstract

Introduction Globally, coronary heart disease is the most imperative cause of premature death. However, timely management with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) can improve the quality of life (QoL) and reduce mortality. The objective of this study was to evaluate the QoL between the patients who received PCI and CABG for the treatment of coronary heart disease. Materials and methods This was a retrospective observational study. Patients who underwent PCI or CABG at least three months before or more at enrollment were purposefully selected. Results A total of 156 patients were enrolled, 78 in each group. Health-related QoL was assessed by using the SF-36 scale for PCI or CABG procedures. The mean ± SD scores of QoL for PCI and CABG were 78.95 ±10.14 and 78.17 ± 10.92, respectively. Of the patients, 72.43% felt better after treatment, 17.95% felt the same as before treatment, and 9.62% felt worse than before treatment in both groups. Among CABG patients, 38.46% felt significantly better after treatment compared to PCI (33.97%) (p=0.048). Moreover, more CABG patients (6.41%) felt significantly worse than PCI patients (3.21%) after treatment (p=0.048). Male patients were significantly more in the CABG group (89.74%) compared to the PCI group (75.64%). In contrast, female patients had more PCI (24.36%) compared to CABG patients (10.26%) (p=0.020). Conclusion Subjective perceptions of physical and mental well-being improved significantly from before treatment to at least three months after treatment, and an enhanced health-related QoL was noticed for medical intervention (PCI) and surgical approach (CABG).