Article Text

Download PDFPDF
One year comparison of costs of coronary surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in the stent or surgery trial
  1. W S Weintraub,
  2. E M Mahoney2,
  3. Z Zhang2,
  4. H Chu2,
  5. J Hutton3,
  6. M Buxton,
  7. J Booth1,
  8. F Nugara1,
  9. R H Stables,
  10. P Dooley1,
  11. J Collinson1,
  12. M Stuteville1,
  13. N Delahunty1,
  14. A Wright1,
  15. M D Flather1,
  16. E De Cock3
  1. 1Central Co-ordination and Data Management, Clinical Trials & Evaluation Unit, Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK
  2. 2The Emory Centre for Outcomes Research, Department of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
  3. 3Unit Costs, Medtap International Inc, London, UK
  1. Correspondence to:
    Dr W S Weintraub
    Division of Cardiology, Emory University, 1256 Briarcliff Road, Suite 1 North, Atlanta, GA 30306, USA;


Objectives: To compare initial and one year costs of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the stent or surgery trial.

Design: Prospective, unblinded, randomised trial.

Setting: Multicentre study.

Patients: 988 patients with multivessel disease.

Interventions: CABG and stent assisted PCI.

Main outcome measures: Initial hospitalisation and one year follow up costs.

Results: At one year mortality was 2.5% in the PCI arm and 0.8% in the CABG arm (p  =  0.05). There was no difference in the composite of death or Q wave myocardial infarction (6.9% for PCI v 8.1% for CABG, p  =  0.49). There were more repeat revascularisations with PCI (17.2% v 4.2% for CABG). There was no significant difference in utility between arms at six months or at one year. Quality adjusted life years were similar 0.6938 for PCI v 0.6954 for PCI, Δ  =  0.00154, 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.0242 to 0.0273). Initial length of stay was longer with CABG (12.2 v 5.4 days with PCI, p < 0.0001) and initial hospitalisation costs were higher (£7321 v £3884 for PCI, Δ  =  £3437, 95% CI £3040 to £3848). At one year the cost difference narrowed but costs remained higher for CABG (£8905 v £6296 for PCI, Δ  =  £2609, 95% CI £1769 to £3314).

Conclusions: Over one year, CABG was more expensive and offered greater survival than PCI but little added benefit in terms of quality adjusted life years. The additional cost of CABG can be justified only if it offers continuing benefit at no further increase in cost relative to PCI over several years.

  • ARTS, arterial revascularisation therapies study
  • BARI, bypass angioplasty revascularisation investigation
  • CABG, coronary artery bypass grafting
  • COURAGE, clinical outcomes utilising revascularisation and aggressive drug evaluation
  • EAST, Emory angioplasty versus surgery trial
  • ERACI, Argentine randomised trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease
  • PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention
  • PTCA, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty
  • RITA-1, randomised intervention treatment of angina
  • SoS, stent or surgery
  • coronary angioplasty
  • coronary bypass surgery
  • health care cost

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.



  • Rodney H Stables (Co-Principal Investigator), Ulrich Sigwart (Co-Principal Investigator), Jean Booth, Raimund Erbel, Peter Währborg, Jacobus Lubsen, Petros Nihoyannopoulos, John Pepper, Spencer B King III, William Weintraub, Peter Sleight.

  • The Clinical Trials and Evaluation Unit, The Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK.

  • The Emory Center for Outcomes Research, Department of Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.

  • Health Economics Research Group, Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK.

  • MEDTAP International Inc, London, UK.