Mortality Outcome Post-MI after PCI and CABG Interventions

Mina Muayad Alwan Al-Naqdi; Mohammed Lateef Mohammed Alkhammasi; Bassam Muayad Alwan Al-Naqdi

doi:10.5334/gh.1556

Mortality Outcome Post-MI after PCI and CABG Interventions

Global Heart

Volume 21 (2026): Issue 1

By: Mina Muayad Alwan Al-Naqdi , Mohammed Lateef Mohammed Alkhammasi and Bassam Muayad Alwan Al-Naqdi

Open Access

|Jun 2026

Abstract

Background and Aim: Worldwide, heart-related conditions, including myocardial infarction (MI), persist as the leading cause of morbidity and mortality. The aim is to compare three-year mortality outcomes and identify causes of death among post-MI patients who received either percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

Methods: This registry-based retrospective cohort with follow-up study analyzed data from 3,542 PCI and 3,244 CABG patients treated post-MI between 2020 and 2024 in two hospitals in Baghdad. Kaplan–Meier curves (log-rank test) were used for unadjusted comparison. Cox proportional hazards regression was employed to compare three-year all-cause mortality, adjusting for baseline demographic and clinical covariates.

Results: Baseline characteristics differed significantly, with CABG patients being older and having a higher prevalence of certain risk factors. Crude observed mortality during available follow-up was 7.99% for PCI and 11.19% for CABG; Kaplan–Meier analysis showed significantly different unadjusted survival distributions by log-rank test. However, after adjusting for baseline covariates, there was no significant difference in the hazard of three-year all-cause mortality between patients undergoing CABG and PCI (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.12, 95% CI = 0.93–1.35, p = 0.280). Significant independent predictors of mortality included age (aHR = 1.04 per year), diabetes mellitus (aHR = 1.45), and renal complications (aHR = 1.70). Non-cardiovascular causes accounted for the majority of deaths in both groups (56.06% post-PCI, 50.11% post-CABG).

Conclusion: In this observational cohort, adjusted three-year mortality was not significantly different between PCI and CABG, with non-cardiac causes accounting for the largest proportion of deaths. Due to potential confounding by indication, these findings represent observational associations rather than clinical equivalence. Both remain vital revascularization strategies, with selection guided by individualized heart-team assessment.

References

Ralapanawa U, Sivakanesan R. Epidemiology and the magnitude of coronary artery disease and acute coronary syndrome: A narrative review. J Epidemiol Glob Health. 2021;11:169–177. DOI: 10.2991/jegh.k.201217.001
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Vervoort D, Sud M, Zeis TM, Haouzi AA, An KR, Rocha R, et al. Do the few dictate care for the many? Revascularization considerations that go beyond the guidelines. Can J Cardiol. 2024;40(2):275–289. DOI: 10.1016/j.cjca.2023.11.007
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, Chaitman BR, Bax JJ, Morrow DA, et al. Fourth universal definition of myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2018;138:e618–e651. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000617
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hosseiny AD, Moloi S, Chandrasekhar J, Farshid A. Mortality pattern and cause of death in a long-term follow-up of patients with STEMI treated with primary PCI. Open Hear. 2016;3:e000405. DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2016-000405
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
McFalls EO, Ward HB, Moritz TE. Coronary-artery revascularization before elective major vascular surgery. J Vasc Surg. 2005;41:733. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa041905
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Marquis-Gravel G, Dalgaard F, Jones AD, Lokhnygina Y, James SK, Harrington RA, et al. Post-discharge bleeding and mortality following acute coronary syndromes with or without PCI. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76:162–171. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.05.031
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ramanathan K, Abel JG, Park JE, Fung A, Mathew V, Taylor CM, et al. Surgical versus percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with diabetes and acute coronary syndromes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:2995–3006. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.029
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Zhang X-L, Zhu Q-Q, Yang J-J, Chen Y-H, Li Y, Zhu S-H, et al. Percutaneous intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery in left main coronary artery stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Med. 2017;15:84. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-017-0853-1
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Shiomi H, et al. Comparison of percutaneous coronary intervention with coronary artery bypass grafting in unprotected left main coronary artery disease–5-year outcome from CREDO-Kyoto PCI/CABG Registry Cohort-2. Circ J. 2015;79:1282–1289. DOI: 10.1253/circj.CJ-15-0034
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Pyxaras SA, et al. Long-term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting for acute coronary syndrome from the DELTA registry: A multicentre registry evaluating percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting for left main treatment. EuroIntervention. 2016;12:e623–e631. DOI: 10.4244/EIJV12I5A102
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Januszek R, et al. Long-term outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions within coronary artery bypass grafts. Arch Med Sci. 2021;17:628–637. DOI: 10.5114/aoms.2018.75608
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Gaba P, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention vs coronary artery bypass graft surgery for left main disease in patients with and without acute coronary syndromes: A pooled analysis of 4 randomized clinical trials. JAMA Cardiol. 2023;8:631–639. DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2023.1177
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kok MM, von Birgelen C. Involving the patient’s perspective and preferences concerning coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. EuroIntervention. 2020;15:1228–1231. DOI: 10.4244/EIJV15I14A221
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Schober P, Vetter TR. Survival analysis and interpretation of time-to-event data: The tortoise and the hare. Anesth Analg. 2018;127:792–798. DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000003653
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Rich JT, et al. A practical guide to understanding Kaplan-Meier curves. Otolaryngol Neck Surg. 2010;143:331–336. DOI: 10.1016/j.otohns.2010.05.007
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Radico F, et al. Determinants of long-term clinical outcomes in patients with angina but without obstructive coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. 2018;39:2135–2146. DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy185
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Pedersen F, et al. Short-and long-term cause of death in patients treated with primary PCI for STEMI. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:2101–2108. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.08.037
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Fokkema ML, et al. Population trends in percutaneous coronary intervention: 20-year results from the SCAAR (Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1222–1230. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2013.01.007
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Spoon DB, et al. Trends in cause of death after percutaneous coronary intervention. Circulation. 2014;129:1286–1294. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.006518
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Tran DT, et al. Total and cause-specific mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention: Observations from the Alberta provincial project for outcome assessment in coronary heart disease registry. CJC Open. 2019;1:182–189. DOI: 10.1016/j.cjco.2019.05.003
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Morice M-C, et al. Outcomes in patients with de novo left main disease treated with either percutaneous coronary intervention using paclitaxel-eluting stents or coronary artery bypass graft treatment in the synergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with TAXUS and C. Circulation. 2010;121:2645–2653. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.899211
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Tran DT, et al. Quality of acute myocardial infarction care in Canada: A 10-year review of 30-day in-hospital mortality and 30-day hospital readmission. Can J Cardiol. 2017;33:1319–1326. DOI: 10.1016/j.cjca.2017.06.014
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Tokushige A, et al. Incidence and outcome of surgical procedures after coronary artery bypass grafting compared with those after percutaneous coronary intervention: A report from the Coronary Revascularization Demonstrating Outcome Study in Kyoto PCI/CABG Registry Cohort-2. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7:482–491. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.113.001056
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Stolker JM, et al. Mode of death after contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention: A report from the evaluation of drug eluting stents and ischemic events registry. Am Heart J. 2011;162:914–921. DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.08.014
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gh.1556 | Journal eISSN: 2211-8179

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 46 - 46

Submitted on: May 10, 2025

Accepted on: May 4, 2026

Published on: Jun 10, 2026

Published by: Ubiquity Press

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

Keywords:

MI,

PCI,

CABG,

mortality rate,

survival analysis,

Cox regression

© 2026 Mina Muayad Alwan Al-Naqdi, Mohammed Lateef Mohammed Alkhammasi, Bassam Muayad Alwan Al-Naqdi, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Volume 21 (2026): Issue 1