Health Related Quality of Life Following Coronary Revascularization: A Prospective Cross-sectional Study

Abstract

Introduction Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are invasive options for managing patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). CABG was first introduced in 1964 and it has been firmly recognized since then as a key surgical intervention for patients with intractable angina pectoris despite medications and myocardial infarction [1,2]. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) established in 1979 by Andreas Gruentzig in Switzerland to treat stenotic coronary lesions of coronary arteries, the procedure then progressed technically and introduced devices like stents which improve not only long-term patency of treated lesions but also the prognosis of patients [3,4]. With the use of both revascularization methods (CABG and PCI), the relief of symptom and survival rates have increased [5]. The relative efficacy, benefits and risks of the two procedures have been compared in several studies [6-12]. In the latest published European and American guidelines, both CABG and PCI are accepted revascularization methods to reduce mortality and improve morbidity [13,14].