Quality of life after percutaneous coronary intervention in no-touch
saphenous vein grafts is significantly better than in conventional vein
grafts
Abstract
Objectives: To compare health-related quality of life of
patients primarily treated with a no-touch saphenous vein graft with
that of patients who received a conventional graft. Methods:
The study included all individuals treated with a percutaneous coronary
intervention on a saphenous vein graft between January 2006 and June
2020. The RAND-36 health survey was used to assess health-related
quality of life. The Mann–Whitney U test was used to test differences
in health-related quality of life between the two groups. Effect size
was estimated via Cohen’s d. The average treatment effect between
the groups was tested by propensity score matching. Results: Of
the 346 patients treated with a percutaneous coronary intervention in a
stenosed or occluded saphenous vein graft, 165 responded to RAND-36
(no-touch: n=48; conventional: n=117). Patients with a no-touch graft
reported better mean values on seven of the eight health survey domains.
Statistically significant differences were observed for four of the
domains, all in favour of the no-touch group. The effect size estimates
indicated a small difference for five domains, with the largest values
(>0.40) seen for the general health and energy/fatigue
domains. Propensity score matching confirmed a statistically significant
difference for the physical functioning and general health domains.
Conclusions: At a mean follow-up of 5.4 years, patients who
received a percutaneous coronary intervention in no-touch vein grafts
showed significantly better health-related quality of life than those
who received a percutaneous coronary intervention in conventional vein
grafts.