Evidence or faith? Coronary artery bypass grafting in elderly patients
======================================================================

* William A. Ghali
* Michelle M. Graham

In a recent commentary MacDonald and colleagues1 asked whether the decision to perform coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in elderly patients is supported by evidence or merely by (blind) faith that we are helping these patients by providing the therapy. This is an important question, considering the general trend toward increased use of this invasive and costly treatment in elderly patients2 and the rapid expansion of elderly populations in most Western countries. MacDonald and colleagues rightly pointed out that the published clinical trials comparing CABG with medical therapy3,4,5 all excluded patients over 65–67 years of age. They also cited a number of studies demonstrating higher perioperative mortality rates6,7,8 and complication rates9,10,11 and lower long-term survival rates7,8 among elderly patients than among younger patients undergoing CABG. In addition, other published studied have demonstrated that short-term treatment costs are higher for elderly patients than for younger patients.12

In this issue (page 759) the article by Kelly Smith and colleagues13 adds to the growing body of literature evaluating outcomes of revascularization therapies in the elderly population. Using a cohort of elderly patients who underwent isolated CABG at a single hospital, Smith and colleagues report that short-term outcomes among octogenarians were similar to those among both young septuagenarians (aged 70–74 years) and old septuagenarians (aged 75–79 years). In-hospital death rates among the young septuagenarians, the old septuagenarians and the octogenarians were 3.3%, 5.7% and 4.2% respectively. However, there were only 71 octogenarians, as compared with 579 young and 384 old septuagenarians. This limits our ability to make strong conclusions; even a single additional death would increase the death rate in the oldest group to 5.6%. For other outcomes measured — complications, length of stay and cost of hospital care — the trend was toward higher rates, longer stays and higher costs for the octogenarians than for the younger patients, but the differences across groups were not statistically significant perhaps because of the relatively small numbers of patients studied. In focusing primarily on statistical significance in their conclusions, the authors are de-emphasizing the probable reality that death rates, complications, length of stay and costs may be somewhat higher among older patients than among younger patients.

Their results are nonetheless encouraging, because they demonstrate that earlier reports of markedly increased rates of adverse events and resource use for CABG among elderly patients may not reflect the current state. Indeed, other recent studies have shown that the risks associated with CABG in elderly patients have decreased. In a 1994 study using US Medicare data, Peterson and colleagues14 showed an 18% decline in the 30-day mortality rate over 4 years for all CABG patients over 65 years of age. In a study that mirrors the one in this issue, Alexander and colleagues15 used data from the National Cardiovascular Network to demonstrate that the rates of adverse outcomes of CABG among octogenarians were lower than those previously reported.15 In fact, among octogenarians with no comorbidities, the short-term death rate approached that among younger patients.

Although such comparisons of outcomes across age groups are informative, a more important comparison is that between elderly patients who undergo revascularization and those who are treated only medically despite severe coronary artery disease. Fortunately, new evidence is beginning to emerge here as well. Sollano and colleagues16 compared the outcomes of a cohort of octogenarians undergoing CABG with those of a cohort of octogenarians treated medically and a subset of that cohort who were offered CABG but declined the procedure. Their results show that the rate of survival to 3 years was significantly higher in the CABG group (80% v. 64% in the medically managed group). Also, Graham and colleagues17 recently reported that elderly patients undergoing revascularization procedures (CABG or angioplasty) in Alberta had more favourable outcomes than did those treated medically and that these findings persisted in analyses that addressed potential selection biases.

Whether the results of such observational studies should be viewed as sufficient evidence to advocate aggressive revascularization in elderly patients is a matter for debate. Some will probably feel that the observational data published to date are sufficiently compelling to make a case (now) for the widespread adoption of aggressive treatment strategies, while others will undoubtedly continue to call for well-designed randomized controlled trials of revascularization in elderly patients.1 Society will, of course, also need to consider the economic questions surrounding aggressive cardiac care in this segment of the population — specifically, the cost-effectiveness of such treatments as well as the opportunity costs (e.g., lost opportunities for spending in other important areas such as population-based prevention programs).

In deciding whether to use CABG in elderly patients, we are clearly relying on more than just faith, as there is an increasing volume of published evidence suggesting reasonable safety of the procedure in elderly patients and probable benefit over medical therapy alone. Given the existing data, we hope that there will now be open discussion and debate regarding the need for, and ethical considerations of, randomized controlled trials of revascularization therapies in elderly patients.

## Acknowledgments

Dr. Ghali is supported by a Population Health Investigator Award from the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research and by a Government of Canada Research Chair in Health Services Research.

## Footnotes

*   *Competing interests:* None declared.

## References

1.  1. MacDonald P, Johnstone D, Rockwood K. Coronary artery bypass surgery for elderly patients: Is our practice based on evidence or faith? [editorial] CMAJ 2000;162(7):1005-6. Available: [www.cma.ca/cmaj/vol-162/issue-7/1005.htm](http://www.cma.ca/cmaj/vol-162/issue-7/1005.htm)
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiY21haiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czoxMDoiMTYyLzcvMTAwNSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjIwOiIvY21hai8xNjUvNi83NzUuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

2.  2. Ghali WA, Brant R, Quan H. CABG in Canada [letter]. CMAJ 1999;161:941. Available: [www.cma.ca/cmaj/vol-161/issue-8/letters-8.htm#1](http://www.cma.ca/cmaj/vol-161/issue-8/letters-8.htm#1)
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiRlVMTCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiY21haiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo5OiIxNjEvOC85NDEiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyMDoiL2NtYWovMTY1LzYvNzc1LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

3.  3. Veterans Administration Coronary Bypass Surgery Cooperative Study Group. Eleven-year survival in the Veterans Administration randomized trial of coronary bypass surgery for stable angina. N Engl J Med 1984;311:1339-9.
    
    [CrossRef](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJM198411223112103&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=6333637&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fcmaj%2F165%2F6%2F775.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1984TS80200003&link_type=ISI) 

4.  4. Varnauskas E. Twelve-year follow-up of survival in the randomized European Coronary Surgery Study. N Engl J Med 1988;319:332-7.
    
    [CrossRef](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJM198808113190603&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=3260659&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fcmaj%2F165%2F6%2F775.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1988P609500003&link_type=ISI) 

5.  5. Coronary artery surgery study (CASS): a randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Survival data. Circulation 1983;68:939-50.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTQ6ImNpcmN1bGF0aW9uYWhhIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjY4LzUvOTM5IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6MjA6Ii9jbWFqLzE2NS82Lzc3NS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

6.  6. Edwards FH, Clark RE, Schwartz M. Coronary artery bypass grafting: the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database experience. Ann Thorac Surg 1994; 57:12-9.
    
    [CrossRef](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/0003-4975(94)90358-1&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=8279877&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fcmaj%2F165%2F6%2F775.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1994MR31800004&link_type=ISI) 

7.  7. Gersh BJ, Kronmal RA, Schaff HV, Frye RL, Ryan TJ, Myers WO, et al. Long-term (5 year) results of coronary bypass surgery in patients 65 years old or older: a report from the Coronary Artery Surgery Study. *Circulation* 1983; 68: II190-9.
    
    

8.  8. Rahimtoola SH, Grunkemeier GL, Star A. Ten year survival after coronary artery bypass surgery for angina in patients aged 65 years and older. Circulation 1986;74:509-17.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTQ6ImNpcmN1bGF0aW9uYWhhIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6Ijc0LzMvNTA5IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6MjA6Ii9jbWFqLzE2NS82Lzc3NS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

9.  9. Roach GW, Kanchuger M, Mangano CM, Newman M, Nussmeier N, Woman R, et al. Adverse cerebral outcomes after coronary bypass surgery. Multicenter Study of Perioperative Ischemia Research Group and the Ischemia Research and Education Foundation Investigators. N Engl J Med 1996; 335:1857-63.
    
    [CrossRef](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJM199612193352501&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=8948560&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fcmaj%2F165%2F6%2F775.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1996VX87400001&link_type=ISI) 

10. 10. Chertow GM, Lazarus JM, Christiansen CL, Cook EF, Hammermeister KE, Grover F, et al. Preoperative renal risk stratification. Circulation 1997;95:878-84.
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTQ6ImNpcmN1bGF0aW9uYWhhIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6Ijk1LzQvODc4IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6MjA6Ii9jbWFqLzE2NS82Lzc3NS5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 

11. 11. Hammermeister KE, Burchfiel C, Johnson R, Grover FL. Identification of patients at greatest risk for developing major complications at cardiac surgery. *Circulation* 1990;82(Suppl 5):IV380-9.
    
    

12. 12. Cohen EA. Coronary artery bypass grafting in elderly patients: the price of success. CMAJ 1999;160:823-5. Available: [www.cma.ca/cmaj/vol-160/issue-6/0823.htm](http://www.cma.ca/cmaj/vol-160/issue-6/0823.htm)
    
    [FREE Full Text](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czo0OiJjbWFqIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjE2MC82LzgyMyI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjIwOiIvY21hai8xNjUvNi83NzUuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 

13. 13. Smith KM, Lamy A, Arthur HM, Gafni A, Kent R. Outcomes and costs of coronary artery bypass grafting: comparison between octogenarians and septuagenarians at a single tertiary centre. CMAJ 2001;165(6):759-64. Available: www .cma.ca/cmaj/vol-165/issue-6/0759.asp
    
    [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiY21haiI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo5OiIxNjUvNi83NTkiO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czoyMDoiL2NtYWovMTY1LzYvNzc1LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 

14. 14. Peterson ED, Jollis JG, Bebchuk JD, DeLong ER, Muhlbaier LH, Mark DB, et al. Changes in mortality after myocardial revascularization in the elderly. The National Medicare experience. Ann Intern Med 1994;121:919-27.
    
    [CrossRef](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7326/0003-4819-121-12-199412150-00003&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=7978717&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fcmaj%2F165%2F6%2F775.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1994PW08300003&link_type=ISI) 

15. 15. Alexander KP, Anstrom KH, Muhlbaier LH, Grosswald RD, Smith PK, Jones RH, et al. Outcomes of cardiac surgery in patients > 80 years: results from the National Cardiovascular Network. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;35:731-8.
    
    [CrossRef](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0735-1097(99)00606-3&link_type=DOI) 
    
    [PubMed](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10716477&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fcmaj%2F165%2F6%2F775.atom) 
    
    [Web of Science](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000085775800025&link_type=ISI) 

16. 16. Sollano JA, Rose EA, Williams DL, Thornton B, Quint E, Apfelbaum M, et al. Cost-effectiveness of coronary artery bypass surgery in octogenarians. Ann Surg 1998;228:298-306.
    
    

17. 17. Graham MM, Faris PD, Ghali WA, Knudtson ML, for the APPROACH Investigators. Long-term outcome of revascularization or medical therapy in a cohort of elderly patients [abstract]. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37(Suppl A):194A.
    
    [CrossRef](http://www.cmaj.ca/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0735-1097(01)80003-6&link_type=DOI)