Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Clinical Research
  • Published:

Comparison of coronary revascularization procedures in octogenarians: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

Background Elderly patients are the fastest growing population in the US healthcare system and more patients aged 80 years and older require CABG or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary revascularization than ever before. Because octogenarian patients have not been adequately represented in randomized trials comparing CABG and PCI, the most appropriate method of revascularization for this group of patients has not been determined.

Methods We performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis of 66 studies of coronary revascularization in patients aged over 80 years. The primary endpoints included 30 day mortality and long-term survival. Subgroup analyses stratified by revascularization type (PCI versus CABG) were also performed.

Results Pooled estimate of 30 day mortality was 6.3% (95% CI 5.3%–7.5%), and for survival at 1, 3 and 5 years, 86% (84%–88%), 78% (74%–81%) and 67% (61%–72%), respectively. A greater number of men (P <0.001) and patients with multivessel disease (P = 0.004) were treated with CABG than with PCI. Pooled estimates, based on type of revascularization, of 30 day mortality and 1 year survival were similar (7.3% [6.3%–8.2%] for CABG vs 5.4% [4.4%–6.4%] for PCI and 86% [83%–88%] for CABG vs 87% [84%–91%] for PCI, respectively).

Conclusions Available data indicate that revascularization can be performed in octogenarians with acceptable short-term and long-term outcomes; most of the evidence is, however, low level. Furthermore, it is unclear whether octogenarians derive greater survival benefit from CABG or from PCI because preprocedural risk profiles differ between intervention types. Periprocedural and long-term outcomes are, however, equivalent, and randomized, controlled trials of high-risk octogenarians are needed.

Key Points

  • We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the clinical outcome of patients aged 80 years and older undergoing coronary revascularization

  • Pooled estimates of 30 day mortality and 1 year survival were 6.3% and 86%, respectively

  • Clinical outcomes were similar for patients undergoing PCI and CABG despite higher preprocedural risk among patients undergoing CABG

  • Based on the similar outcomes observed between intervention type as well as future demand for resources and clinical guidelines for an aging population, randomized, controlled trials of revascularization in high-risk octogenarians is both ethical and necessary

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Selection process of individual studies included in the analysis.
Figure 2: Thirty day mortality by revascularization type.
Figure 3: One year survival by revascularization type.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Spencer G (1989) U.S. Bureau of the Census: projections of the population of the United States, by age, sex and race: 1988-2080. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; Current Population Reports, Vol Series P-25, No. 1018

    Google Scholar 

  2. Mullany CJ et al. (1990) Early and late results after isolated coronary artery bypass surgery in 159 patients aged 80 years and older. Circulation 82: IV229–IV236

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Singh M et al. (2000) Effect of age on the outcome of angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction among patients treated at the Mayo Clinic. Am J Med 108: 187–192

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rogers WJ et al. (1995) Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI): baseline clinical and angiographic data. Am J Cardiol 75: 9C–17C

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. King SB 3rd et al. (1994) A randomized trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST). N Engl J Med 331: 1044–1050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. No author (1993) Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomised Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial. Lancet 341: 573–580

  7. No author (1995) First-year results of CABRI (Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularization Investigation). Lancet 346: 1179–1184

  8. Hoffman SN et al. (2003) A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing coronary artery bypass graft with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: one- to eight-year outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol 41: 1293–1304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. SAS Institute Inc (2005) SAS®/STAT User's Guide. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.

  10. StatsDirect (2007) Version 2.5.4 Edition. Chesham, UK: StatsDirect, Ltd

  11. Abizaid AS et al. (2000) Influence of patient age on acute and late clinical outcomes following Palmaz-Schatz coronary stent implantation. Am J Cardiol 85: 338–343

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Akins CW et al. (1997) Cardiac operations in patients 80 years old and older. Ann Thorac Surg 64: 606–614; discussion 614–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Alexander KP et al. (2000) Outcomes of cardiac surgery in patients &gt; or = 80 years: results from the National Cardiovascular Network. J Am Coll Cardiol 35: 731–738

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Ang PC et al. (2000) Percutaneous coronary intervention in the elderly: a comparison of procedural and clinical outcomes between the eighth and ninth decades. J Invasive Cardiol 12: 488–494

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Antoniucci D et al. (1999) Systematic primary angioplasty in octogenarian and older patients. Am Heart J 138: 670–674

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Barnett SD et al. (2003) Postoperative complications among octogenarians after cardiovascular surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 76: 726–731

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Baskett R et al. (2005) Outcomes in octogenarians undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. CMAJ 172: 1183–1186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Batchelor WB et al. (2000) Contemporary outcome trends in the elderly undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions: results in 7,472 octogenarians. National Cardiovascular Network Collaboration. J Am Coll Cardiol 36: 723–730

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Beauford RB et al. (2003) Multivessel off-pump revascularization in octogenarians: early and midterm outcomes. Ann Thorac Surg 76: 12–17; discussion 17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Baklanov DV et al. (2006) Coronary stenting is safe and effective in a high-risk octogenarian patient cohort. Conn Med 70: 15–19

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. D'Ancona G et al. (2001) Myocardial revascularization of the beating heart in high-risk patients. J Card Surg 16: 132–139

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Dynina O et al. (2003) In-hospital outcomes of contemporary percutaneous coronary interventions in the very elderly. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 58: 351–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Feldma DN et al. (2006) Comparison of outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions in patients of three age groups (&lt;60, 60 to 80, and &gt;80 years) (from the New York State Angioplasty Registry). Am J Cardiol 98: 1334–1339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gach O et al. (2003) Predictors of early and late outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention in octogenarians. Acta Cardiol 58: 289–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Glower DD et al. (1992) Performance status and outcome after coronary artery bypass grafting in persons aged 80 to 93 years. Am J Cardiol 70: 567–571

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Graham MM et al. (2002) Survival after coronary revascularization in the elderly. Circulation 105: 2378–2384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hassani SE et al. (2006) Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents in octogenarians: characteristics, clinical presentation, and outcomes. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 68: 36–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hoff SJ et al. (2002) Coronary artery bypass in patients 80 years and over: is off-pump the operation of choice? Ann Thorac Surg 74: S1340–S1343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Jackman JD Jr et al. (1991) Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in octogenarians as an effective therapy for angina pectoris. Am J Cardiol 68: 116–119

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Jeroudi MO et al. (1990) Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in octogenarians. Ann Intern Med 113: 423–428

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Kaul TK et al. (1994) Angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass in octogenarians. Ann Thorac Surg 58: 1419–1426

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Klein LW et al. (2002) Percutaneous coronary interventions in octogenarians in the American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry: development of a nomogram predictive of in-hospital mortality. J Am Coll Cardiol 40: 394–402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ko W et al. (1991) Isolated coronary artery bypass grafting in one hundred consecutive octogenarian patients. A multivariate analysis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 102: 532–538

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Kobayashi Y et al. (2003) Comparison of in-hospital and one-year outcomes after multiple coronary arterial stenting in patients &gt; or =80 years old versus those &lt;80 years old. Am J Cardiol 92: 443–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Kolh P et al. (2001) Cardiac surgery in octogenarians; peri-operative outcome and long-term results. Eur Heart J 22: 1235–1243

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Kozower BD et al. (2005) Impact of complete revascularization on long-term survival after coronary artery bypass grafting in octogenarians. Ann Thorac Surg 80: 112–116; discussion 116–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kurlansky PA et al. (2003) Arterial grafting results in reduced operative mortality and enhanced long-term quality of life in octogenarians. Ann Thorac Surg 76: 418–426; discussion 427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Lin CY et al. (2003) Off-pump technique in coronary artery bypass grafting in elderly patients. ANZ J Surg 73: 473–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Little T et al. (1993) Late outcome and quality of life following percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in octogenarians. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 29: 261–266

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Louvard Y et al. (2004) Comparison of transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary angiography and angioplasty in octogenarians (the OCTOPLUS study). Am J Cardiol 94: 1177–1180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Matetzky S et al. (2001) Primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction in octogenarians. Am J Cardiol 88: 680–683

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Mayer C et al. (2003) Self-reported functional status as a predictor of coronary artery bypass graft surgery outcome in elderly patients. Can J Cardiol 19: 140–144

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Mick MJ et al. (1991) Early and late results of coronary angioplasty and bypass in octogenarians. Am J Cardiol 68: 1316–1320

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Morris RJ et al. (1996) Internal thoracic artery for coronary artery grafting in octogenarians. Ann Thorac Surg 62: 16–22

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Myler RK et al. (1991) Coronary angioplasty in octogenarians: comparisons to coronary bypass surgery. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 23: 3–9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Nagpal AD et al. (2006) Early outcomes of coronary artery bypass with and without cardiopulmonary bypass in octogenarians. Can J Cardiol 22: 849–853

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Nallamothu BK et al. (2002) Coronary artery bypass grafting in octogenarians: clinical and economic outcomes at community-based healthcare facilities. Am J Manag Care 8: 749–755

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Niebauer J et al. (2004) Contemporary outcome of cardiac catheterizations in 1085 consecutive octogenarians. Int J Cardiol 93: 225–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Oe K et al. (2003) In-hospital outcome in octogenarians with acute coronary syndrome undergoing emergent coronary angiography. Jpn Heart J 44: 11–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Peterson ED et al. (1995) Outcomes of coronary artery bypass graft surgery in 24,461 patients aged 80 years or older. Circulation 92: II85–II91

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Pliam MB et al. (1999) Recent improvement in results of coronary bypass surgery in octogenarians. J Invasive Cardiol 11: 281–289

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Ranger WR et al. (1996) Coronary artery bypass and valve replacement in octogenarians. Am Surg 62: 941–946

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Rich JJ et al. (1990) Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in patients 80 years of age and older. Am J Cardiol 65: 675–676

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Rizo-Patron C et al. (1990) Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in octogenarians with unstable coronary syndromes. Am J Cardiol 66: 857–858

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Rossi ML et al. (2006) “Do least harm” philosophy may suffice for percutaneous coronary intervention in octogenarians. J Interv Cardiol 19: 313–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Rozenman Y et al. (1995) Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty in Octogenarians. Am J Geriatr Cardiol 4: 32–41

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Sadeghi HM et al. (2003) Percutaneous coronary interventions in octogenarians. glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitors' safety profile. J Am Coll Cardiol 42: 428–432

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Sahar G et al. (1999) Outcome and risk factors in octogenarians undergoing open-heart surgery. J Heart Valve Dis 8: 162–166

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Sakamoto S et al. (2001) Coronary artery bypass grafting in octogenarians. Cardiovasc Surg 9: 487–491

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Santana JO et al. (1992) Coronary angioplasty in patients eighty years of age or older. Am Heart J 124: 13–18

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Scott BH et al. (2005) Octogenarians undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: resource utilization, postoperative mortality, and morbidity. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 19: 583–538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Shimokawa T et al. (2003) Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in octogenarians. Jpn J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 51: 86–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Smith KM et al. (2001) Outcomes and costs of coronary artery bypass grafting: comparison between octogenarians and septuagenarians at a tertiary care centre. CMAJ 165: 759–764

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Sollano JA et al. (1998) Cost-effectiveness of coronary artery bypass surgery in octogenarians. Ann Surg 228: 297–306

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Stamou SC et al. (2000) Beating heart surgery in octogenarians: perioperative outcome and comparison with younger age groups. Ann Thorac Surg 69: 1140–1145

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Suilen C (1996) Coronary stenting in octogenarians following failed balloon angioplasty. Cardiol in Elderly 4: 157–160

    Google Scholar 

  67. Talwakar NG (1996) Outcome of isolated coronary artery bypass surgery in octogenarians. J Card Surg 11: 172–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Teplitsky I et al. (2003) Acute and intermediate-term results of percutaneous coronary stenting in octogenarian patients. Int J Cardiovasc Intervent 5: 195–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Tsai TP et al. (1991) Morbidity and mortality after coronary artery bypass in octogenarians. Ann Thorac Surg 51: 983–986

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Utley JR and Leyland SA (1991) Coronary artery bypass grafting in the octogenarian. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 101: 866–870

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Vijayakumar M et al. (2004) Effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for the treatment of coronary artery disease in octogenarians. Am J Cardiol 94: 909–913

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Weintraub WS et al. (2001) Percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes in octogenarians during the stent era (National Cardiovascular Network). Am J Cardiol 88: 1407–1410, A6

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Wennberg DE et al. (1999) Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in the elderly: epidemiology, clinical risk factors, and in-hospital outcomes. The Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. Am Heart J 137: 639–645

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Williams DB et al. (1995) Determinants of operative mortality in octogenarians undergoing coronary bypass. Ann Thorac Surg 60: 1038–1043

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Pfisterer M et al. (2003) Outcome of elderly patients with chronic symptomatic coronary artery disease with an invasive vs optimized medical treatment strategy: one-year results of the randomized TIME trial. JAMA 289: 1117–1123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Taggart DP and Thomas B (2006) Ferguson Lecture. Coronary artery bypass grafting is still the best treatment for multivessel and left main disease, but patients need to know. Ann Thorac Surg 82: 1966–1975

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thoralf M Sundt III.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Table 1

Publications included in systematic review and meta-analysis. (DOC 147 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McKellar, S., Brown, M., Frye, R. et al. Comparison of coronary revascularization procedures in octogenarians: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Nat Rev Cardiol 5, 738–746 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpcardio1348

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpcardio1348

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing