Is Percutaneous Coronary Angioplasty Less Expensive Than Bypass Surgery?

Guy S. Reeder, Iqbal Krishan, Fred T. Nobrega, James Naessens, Mary Kelly, Jon B. Christianson, Molly K. Mcafee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

79 Scopus citations


Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty is widely considered to be an acceptable and less expensive alternative to bypass surgery in carefully selected patients. We compared expenditures related to cardiac care for 79 unselected patients undergoing coronary angioplasty with expenditures for 89 unselected patients undergoing elective coronary bypass surgery without a previous attempt at angioplasty. All the patients had single-vessel disease. The mean aggregate one-year monetary outlay was 15 percent lower in the angioplasty group than in the bypass-surgery group. A major component of the expense of angioplasty was the treatment of re-Stenosis in the 33 percent of patients in this group in whom this late complication occurred. We conclude that percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty has potential for reducing expenditures for cardiac revascularization and that a further reduction may be obtainable when the rates of re-Stenosis are improved. (N Engl J Med 1984; 311:1157–62.).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1157-1162
Number of pages6
JournalNew England Journal of Medicine
Issue number18
StatePublished - Nov 1 1984

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)


Dive into the research topics of 'Is Percutaneous Coronary Angioplasty Less Expensive Than Bypass Surgery?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this