Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation vs. percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic coronary syndrome: impact on morbidity and mortality

Accumulating evidence questions the clinical value of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS). We therefore compare the impact of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) vs. PCI in patients with CCS on 18-month mortality and morbidity, and evaluate the effects of combining PCI with exercise-based CR.

A retrospective cohort study was conducted in March 2021. An online, real-world dataset of CCS patients was acquired, utilizing TriNetX, a global federated health research network. Patients with CCS who received PCI were first compared with patients who were prescribed exercise-based CR. Second, we compared patients who received both CR + PCI vs. CR alone. For both comparisons, patients were propensity-score matched by age, sex, race, comorbidities, medications, and procedures. We ascertained 18-month incidence of all-cause mortality, rehospitalization, and cardiovascular comorbidity [stroke, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and new-onset heart failure]. The initial cohort consisted of 18 383 CCS patients. Following propensity score matching, exercise-based CR was associated with significantly lower odds of all-cause mortality [0.37 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.29–0.47)], rehospitalization [0.29 (95% CI: 0.27–0.32)], and cardiovascular morbidities, compared to PCI. Subsequently, patients that received both CR + PCI did not have significantly different odds for all-cause mortality [1.00 (95% CI: 0.63–1.60)], rehospitalization [1.00 (95% CI: 0.82–1.23)], AMI [1.11 (95% CI: 0.68–1.81)], and stroke [0.71 (95% CI: 0.39–1.31)], compared to CR only.

Compared to PCI, exercise-based CR associated with significantly lower odds of 18-month all-cause mortality, rehospitalization, and cardiovascular morbidity in patients with CCS, whilst combining PCI and exercise-based CR associated with lower incident heart failure only.