Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 14, 2026

Author Spotlight: Enhancing Coronary Artery Revascularization
Published on: September 15, 2023
Survival difference between coronary bypass surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention
1Department of cardiology, LHL-Clinics Feiring , Feiring , Norway.
Insights
Coronary artery bypass surgery shows persistently lower death rates than percutaneous coronary intervention in three-vessel disease patients. This finding suggests bypass surgery remains the standard treatment for these individuals.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Surgery
- Interventional Cardiology
- Health Outcomes Research
Background:
- Coronary artery bypass surgery (CABS) has historically shown survival benefits over percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in certain coronary artery disease (CAD) subsets.
- Recent trends in revascularization strategies warrant an updated assessment of these outcomes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine if the survival advantage of CABS over PCI in specific CAD patient groups persists in contemporary practice.
- To compare outcomes between two distinct treatment periods: 1999-2005 and 2006-2011.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 17,739 patients undergoing coronary revascularization at Feiring Heart Clinic.
- Survival data were analyzed using Cox regression and propensity score matching for two distinct time cohorts.
- Follow-up duration was 5 years post-procedure.
Main Results:
- No significant survival difference was observed between CABS and PCI for one- and two-vessel disease in either time period.
- In three-vessel disease, CABS demonstrated a persistent survival benefit over PCI, with hazard ratios of 0.62 and 0.59 in the respective time periods (p < 0.001).
- These results indicate a consistent advantage for bypass surgery in complex multivessel disease.
Conclusions:
- The superior survival rates associated with coronary artery bypass surgery compared to percutaneous coronary intervention in three-vessel disease patients are sustained in recent years.
- Coronary artery bypass surgery should continue to be considered the standard of care for patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease.
Objectives:
To assess whether the previously observed lower death rate with coronary artery bypass surgery compared with percutaneous coronary intervention in subsets of patients with coronary artery disease persists in more recent years.
Design:
Retrospective study from Feiring Heart Clinic database of survival in 17739 patients followed for 5 years after coronary revascularization. The cohorts treated in 1999-2005 and 2006-2011 were compared using Cox regression and propensity score analyses.
Results:
Cox regression and propensity score analyses revealed no difference in survival in either time period in one- and two-vessel diseases. In three-vessel disease, the hazard ratios between bypass surgery and percutaneous intervention were 0.62 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53-0.71, p < 0.001) and 0.59 (95% CI: 0.47-0.73, p < 0.001), respectively, in the two time periods, indicating persistent higher survival with bypass surgery.
Conclusions:
The previously observed lower death rate of coronary artery bypass surgery compared with percutaneous intervention in patients with three-vessel disease is persistent in more recent years and indicates that bypass surgery still should be the standard treatment for these patients.
More Related Videos
09:12Surgical Swine Model of Chronic Cardiac Ischemia Treated by Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery
Published on: March 27, 2018
12:00Evaluation of a Novel Laser-assisted Coronary Anastomotic Connector - the Trinity Clip - in a Porcine Off-pump Bypass Model
Published on: November 24, 2014
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care
Peripheral Artery Disease V: Postoperative Nursing Management
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Cardiac Catheterization I: Pre-Procedure Overview