Oliveira, Sérgio Almeida de

Background— Despite routine use of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), no conclusive evidence exists that either modality is superior to medical therapy (MT) alone for treating multivessel coronary artery disease with stable angina and preserved ventricular function. Methods and Results— The primary end points were total mortality, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or refractory angina requiring revascularization. The study comprised 611 patients randomly assigned to undergo CABG (n=203), PCI (n=205), or MT (n=203). At the 5-year follow-up, the primary end points occurred in 21.2% of patients who underwent CABG compared with 32.7% treated with PCI and 36% receiving MT alone ( P =0.0026). No statistical differences were observed in overall mortality among the 3 groups. In addition, 9.4% of MT and 11.2% of PCI patients underwent repeat revascularization procedures compared with 3.9% of CABG patients ( P =0.021). Moreover, 15.3%, 11.2%, and 8.3% of patients experienced nonfatal myocardial infarction in the MT, PCI, and CABG groups, respectively ( P <0.001). The pairwise treatment comparisons of the primary end points showed no difference between PCI and MT (relative risk, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.67 to 1.30) and a significant protective effect of CABG compared with MT (relative risk, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.36 to 0.77). Conclusions— All 3 treatment regimens yielded comparable, relatively low rates of death. MT was associated with an incidence of long-term events and rate of additional revascularization similar to those for PCI. CABG was superior to MT in terms of the primary end points, reaching a significant 44% reduction in primary end points at the 5-year follow-up of patients with stable multivessel coronary artery disease.

Background— Prior comparisons of costs following CABG and PTCA have demonstrated higher initial costs after CABG but following PTCA, recurrent symptoms and repeat revascularization result in increased late costs and over time their costs equilibrate. The MASS II trial provides an opportunity to compare the costs of CABG and PTCA in addition to a strategy of medical therapy. Methods— We studied the 611 patients of MASS II [Medical (203), Angioplasty (205), or Surgery (203) Study], a randomized study to compare treatments for multivessel CAD and preserved left ventricle function. The costs were: CABG US$ 10 650.00; PTCA US$ 6400.00; new AMI hospitalization AMI U$ 2550; angiography not followed-up of PTCA US$ 1900.00; and medication US$ 1200.00 for medical, and US$ 1000.00 for the other groups. We did adjustment for average event-free time, and angina-free proportion. The statistical analysis carried out was chi-square, t test, and analysis of variance. Results— After 1 year, 49% Medical, 79% PTCA, and 88% CABG became angina-free; P <0.0001. There were 26 coronary angiograms (5 medical, 17 PTCA, and 4 CABG), 23 AMI (8 medical, 17 PTCA, and 6 CABG; P =0.03); PTCA was performed in 7 Medical, 17 PTCA, and 1 CABG, ( P =0.0003), CABG was performed in 15 Medical, 8 PTCA, and zero CABG; P =0.002. The event-free and event and angina-free-costs in the first year were US$ 2453.50 and US$5006.32 for Medical; US$ 10348,43; and US$ 13 099.31 for PTCA; and US$ 12 404.21 and US$ 14 095.09 for CABG group. An increase from expected costs of 317%, 77%, and 21%, respectively. Conclusion— PTCA effective costs were similar to CAGB costs, Medical treatment presented the lowest cost, and however, the greatest increment, and CABG presented the most stable costs.