We have located links that may give you full text access.
Does off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) surgery improve the outcome in high-risk patients?: a comparative study of 1398 high-risk patients.
European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery 2003 January
OBJECTIVE: Although there has been some evidence supporting the theoretical and practical advantages of off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) over the conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), it has not yet been determined which group of patients would benefit most from it. It has been advocated recently that high-risk patients could benefit most from avoidance of CPB. The aim of this retrospective study is to assess the efficacy of the OPCAB technique in multi-vessel myocardial revascularization in a large series of high-risk patients.
METHODS: The records of 1398 consecutive high-risk patients who underwent primary isolated CABG at Harefield Hospital between August 1996 and December 2001 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were considered as high-risk and included in the study if they had a preoperative EuroSCORE of > or =5. Two hundred and eighty-six patients were operated on using the OPCAB technique while 1112 patients were operated on using the conventional CABG technique with CPB. The OPCAB patients were significantly older than the CPB patients (68.1+/-8.3 vs. 63.7+/-9.9 years, respectively, P<0.001). The OPCAB group included significantly more patients with poor left ventricular (LV) function (ejection fraction (EF) < or =30%) (P<0.001) and more patients with renal problems (P<0.001).
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the number of grafts between the groups. The CPB patients received 2.8+/-1.2 grafts per patient while OPCAB patients received 2.8+/-0.5 grafts per patient (P=1). Twenty-one (7.3%) OPCAB patients had one or more major complications, while 158 (14.2%) CPB patients (P=0.008) developed major complications. Thirty-eight (3.4%) CPB patients developed peri-operative myocardial infarction (MI) while only two (0.7%) OPCAB patients developed peri-operative MI (P=0.024). The intensive therapy unit (ITU) stay for OPCAB patients was 29.3+/-15.4 h while for CPB patients it was 63.6+/-167.1 h (P<0.001). There were ten (3.5%) deaths in the OPCAB patients compared to 78 (7%) deaths in the CPB patients (P=0.041) within 30 days postoperatively.
CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study shows that using the OPCAB technique for multi-vessel myocardial revascularization in high-risk patients significantly reduces the incidence of peri-operative MI and other major complications, ITU stay and mortality. Even though the OPCAB group included a significantly higher proportion of older patients with poor LV function (EF < or =30%) and renal problems, the beneficial effect of OPCAB was evident.
METHODS: The records of 1398 consecutive high-risk patients who underwent primary isolated CABG at Harefield Hospital between August 1996 and December 2001 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were considered as high-risk and included in the study if they had a preoperative EuroSCORE of > or =5. Two hundred and eighty-six patients were operated on using the OPCAB technique while 1112 patients were operated on using the conventional CABG technique with CPB. The OPCAB patients were significantly older than the CPB patients (68.1+/-8.3 vs. 63.7+/-9.9 years, respectively, P<0.001). The OPCAB group included significantly more patients with poor left ventricular (LV) function (ejection fraction (EF) < or =30%) (P<0.001) and more patients with renal problems (P<0.001).
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the number of grafts between the groups. The CPB patients received 2.8+/-1.2 grafts per patient while OPCAB patients received 2.8+/-0.5 grafts per patient (P=1). Twenty-one (7.3%) OPCAB patients had one or more major complications, while 158 (14.2%) CPB patients (P=0.008) developed major complications. Thirty-eight (3.4%) CPB patients developed peri-operative myocardial infarction (MI) while only two (0.7%) OPCAB patients developed peri-operative MI (P=0.024). The intensive therapy unit (ITU) stay for OPCAB patients was 29.3+/-15.4 h while for CPB patients it was 63.6+/-167.1 h (P<0.001). There were ten (3.5%) deaths in the OPCAB patients compared to 78 (7%) deaths in the CPB patients (P=0.041) within 30 days postoperatively.
CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study shows that using the OPCAB technique for multi-vessel myocardial revascularization in high-risk patients significantly reduces the incidence of peri-operative MI and other major complications, ITU stay and mortality. Even though the OPCAB group included a significantly higher proportion of older patients with poor LV function (EF < or =30%) and renal problems, the beneficial effect of OPCAB was evident.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app