Effects of off-pump and on-pump coronary-artery bypass grafting at 1 year

Single-Centre Experience of Off-Pump Multi-Vessel Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Using Proximal Suture Device

BACKGROUND

To investigate the results of off-pump coronary artery grafting (OPCAB) with the proximal suture device (PSD) regarding postoperative stroke and graft patency.

METHODS

The PSD was used in 376 patients (32.0%), aorta-no-touch OPCAB was performed in 523 patients (45.2%), on-pump beating coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) (on-beat group) in 125 patients (10.6%) including 51 conversions (conversion rate: 5.4%), and CABG with aortic clamp use (clamp group) in 152 patients. In the PSD group, Enclose II was used in 267 patients (71.0%).

RESULTS

The hospital mortality rate was 1.95%. There was no early stroke in the OPCAB group, whereas the early-stroke rate was 0.8% in the on-beat group and 2.6% in the clamp group. The incidences of stroke at one month were: PSD group, 1.6%; no-touch group, 1.1%; on-beat group, 1.6%; and clamp group, 4.6% (p=0.014). The rates of complete revascularisation were higher in the PSD and clamp groups (94.7 and 94.0%, respectively) compared with the no-touch and on-beat groups (81.5 and 84.9%, respectively; p<0.001). The vein graft patency rates were comparable between the PSD and clamp groups. In multiple logistic regression analysis, OPCAB using the PSD did not increase the risk of stroke compared with the no-touch group (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 1.40; p=0.594) or on-beat group (AOR: 0.99; p=0.206), but reduced the risk of stroke compared with the clamp group (AOR: 0.19; p=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Off-pump coronary artery grafting using the PSD was a safe and effective procedure. It led to lower incidences of postoperative stroke and excellent rates of graft patency and complete revascularisation compared with conventional CABG.

Randomized Trial of Bilateral versus Single Internal-Thoracic-Artery Grafts

BACKGROUND

The use of bilateral internal thoracic (mammary) arteries for coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) may improve long-term outcomes as compared with the use of a single internal-thoracic-artery plus vein grafts.

METHODS

We randomly assigned patients scheduled for CABG to undergo single or bilateral internal-thoracic-artery grafting in 28 cardiac surgical centers in seven countries. The primary outcome was death from any cause at 10 years. The composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or stroke was a secondary outcome. Interim analyses were prespecified at 5 years of follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 3102 patients were enrolled; 1554 were randomly assigned to undergo single internal-thoracic-artery grafting (the single-graft group) and 1548 to undergo bilateral internal-thoracic-artery grafting (the bilateral-graft group). At 5 years of follow-up, the rate of death was 8.7% in the bilateral-graft group and 8.4% in the single-graft group (hazard ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.32; P=0.77), and the rate of the composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or stroke was 12.2% and 12.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.17; P=0.69). The rate of sternal wound complication was 3.5% in the bilateral-graft group versus 1.9% in the single-graft group (P=0.005), and the rate of sternal reconstruction was 1.9% versus 0.6% (P=0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing CABG, there was no significant difference between those receiving single internal-thoracic-artery grafts and those receiving bilateral internal-thoracic-artery grafts with regard to mortality or the rates of cardiovascular events at 5 years of follow-up. There were more sternal wound complications with bilateral internal-thoracic-artery grafting than with single internal-thoracic-artery grafting. Ten-year follow-up is ongoing. (Funded by the British Heart Foundation and others; ART Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN46552265 .).

Five-Year Outcomes after Off-Pump or On-Pump Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting

BACKGROUND

We previously reported that there was no significant difference at 30 days or at 1 year in the rate of the composite outcome of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, or renal failure between patients who underwent coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) performed with a beating-heart technique (off-pump) and those who underwent CABG performed with cardiopulmonary bypass (on-pump). We now report the results at 5 years (the end of the trial).

METHODS

A total of 4752 patients (from 19 countries) who had coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to undergo off-pump or on-pump CABG. For this report, we analyzed a composite outcome of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, renal failure, or repeat coronary revascularization (either CABG or percutaneous coronary intervention). The mean follow-up period was 4.8 years.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the off-pump group and the on-pump group in the rate of the composite outcome (23.1% and 23.6%, respectively; hazard ratio with off-pump CABG, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87 to 1.10; P=0.72) or in the rates of the components of the outcome, including repeat coronary revascularization, which was performed in 2.8% of the patients in the off-pump group and in 2.3% of the patients in the on-pump group (hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.73; P=0.29). The secondary outcome for the overall period of the trial - the mean cost in U.S. dollars per patient - also did not differ significantly between the off-pump group and the on-pump group ($15,107 and $14,992, respectively; between-group difference, $115; 95% CI, -$697 to $927). There were no significant between-group differences in quality-of-life measures.

CONCLUSIONS

In our trial, the rate of the composite outcome of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, renal failure, or repeat revascularization at 5 years of follow-up was similar among patients who underwent off-pump CABG and those who underwent on-pump CABG. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; CORONARY ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00463294 .).

On pump versus off pump coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with end-stage renal disease and coronary artery disease - A nation-wide, propensity score matched database analyses

OBJECTIVE

The usage of on or off cardiopulmonary bypass in patients with coronary artery disease receiving coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery had been debated and had not yet been investigated thoroughly in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). We aimed to study cardiovascular outcomes and total mortality in these patients by using our National Health Insurance (NHI) database.

METHOD

By using our NHI ESRD claim database, we searched ESRD patients aged more than 18years, who received CABG and divided them into on pump and off pump groups. Baseline characteristics and underlying comorbidities were identified from the database. Propensity score (PS) method was used to match all the potential confounders between patients. Outcomes including mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke and repeat revascularization within 30days, 1year and whole follow-up period were also obtained.

RESULT

A total of 134,410 ESRD patients were identified in the database. We included 341 patients and 543 patients who received off pump and on pump CABG respectively. The hazard ratios of different outcomes at 30days, 1year and a median of 745days after CABG did not show significant different between on, or off pump groups before and after PS match.

CONCLUSION

ESRD patients with CAD undergoing either on pump or off pump CABG surgery showed similar outcomes in 30days, 1year and whole follow-up period.

The future of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: a North American perspective

Off-pump coronary artery bypass graft (OPCAB) is currently performed routinely in a minority of specialized centers and in many more centers, utilized only when a porcelain aorta mandates a no-touch aortic technique. The OPCAB literature can be summarized as follows: (I) large-scale randomized trials in relatively low risk patients that include surgeons with a range of experience demonstrating no consistent beneficial differences in major cardiovascular and cerebrovascular outcomes but lower transfusion rates and shorter length of stay, tempered by some reports of higher rates of incomplete revascularization and lower rates of long term graft patency; (II) smaller randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from highly specialized programs demonstrating equivalent or superior outcomes with OPCAB and similar completeness of revascularization and graft patency; and (III) observational data from large databases demonstrating a consistent benefit of OPCAB, especially in higher-risk patient subsets. Our rationale for OPCAB remains that if complete and precise revascularization can be safely and routinely accomplished, then the patient should benefit by avoiding the morbidities that can be attributed to aortic cannulation/clamping, cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), hemodilution, hypothermia and global myocardial ischemia/cardioplegia. We further believe that OPCAB procedures should emphasize the use of arterial grafts to optimize long term patency and minimize aortic manipulation to limit the risk of stroke. Moving forward, the off-pump surgical community and specialty societies must address the challenge of training surgeons and their teams to master this technically demanding procedure. Furthermore, OPCAB opens the door to minimally-invasive surgical revascularization via hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR). A large NIH-funded RCT is currently underway to determine whether hybrid revascularization can offer a superior alternative to multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with low SYNTAX score and proximal LAD disease.

Current outcomes of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: evidence from real world practice

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) can be performed conventionally using cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and aortic clamping or on a beating heart (BH) without the use of CPB, the so-called off-pump CABG. Some surgeons, who are proponents of off-pump CABG, preferentially use this technique for the majority of operations, whereas others use it only in certain situations which warrant avoidance of CPB. Ever since the conception of off-pump CABG, the never-ending debate about which technique of CABG is safe and efficacious continues to date. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted that have either favored on-pump CABG or have failed to show a significant difference in outcomes between the two techniques. However, these RCTs have been fraught with claims that they do not represent the majority of patients undergoing CABG in real world practice. Therefore, assessment of the benefits and drawbacks of each technique through observational and registry studies would be more representative of patients encountered in daily practice. The present review examines various retrospective studies and meta-analyses of observational studies that compare the early and long-term outcomes of off- and on-pump CABG, which assesses their safety and efficacy. Additionally, their outcomes in older patients, females, and those with diabetes mellitus, renal dysfunction, presence of ascending aortic disease, and/or acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have also been discussed separately. The general consensus is that early results of off-pump CABG are comparable to or in some cases better than on-pump CABG. However, on-pump CABG provides a survival benefit in the long term according to a majority of publications in literature.

Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in high-risk patients: a review

The role of off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) grafting in high risk patients remains controversial. While there have been studies showing the potential benefits of it, there is still a lot to be learned from the application of this technique in this sub-group of patients. The results of the different trials and papers that we reviewed seem to indicate a benefit in the OPCAB group. Despite of the fact that trials were significantly different in methodology, especially when choosing the risk score stratification tool or the cut-off to define high risk the literature seems to suggest a benefit from the use of OPCAB surgery. Here, we present a review which focussed on early and late outcome in high risk patients undergoing on- and off-pump coronary revascularization.

Impact of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting on survival: current best available evidence

The superiority of either off-pump (OPCAB) or on-pump (ONCAB) coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains unclear despite a large body of literature evidence comparing the two approaches. The potential advantages of avoiding cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), minimizing aortic manipulation and maintaining pulsatile flow may be associated with reduced inflammatory responses and embolic events. Numerous studies compared OPCAB with ONCAB and the cumulative data have been presented in meta-analyses of both randomized and observational studies. Although there is an abundance of data with respect to the operative morbidity and mortality and the short-term outcomes associated with these two strategies, not much is known about how they impact long-term survival and recurrence of myocardial ischaemic events. Recent studies and meta-analyses have focused on long-term survival and major secondary outcomes in OPCAB vs. ONCAB within the general population. Significant limitations in methodology, however, have raised concerns about the strength of several randomized trials with restrictive inclusion criteria that reduced the populations to those at low risk only, thus creating result bias. Here, we present a review of the best available evidence with a focus on long-term outcomes.

Current outcomes of off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: evidence from randomized controlled trials

Coronary artery bypass grafting remains the standard treatment for patients with extensive coronary artery disease. Coronary surgery without use of cardiopulmonary bypass avoids the deleterious systemic inflammatory effects of the extracorporeal circuit. However there is an ongoing debate surrounding the clinical outcomes after on-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass (ONCAB versus OPCAB) surgery. The current review is based on evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses of randomized studies. It focuses on operative mortality, mid- and long-term survival, graft patency, completeness of revascularisation, neurologic and neurophysiologic outcomes, perioperative complications and outcomes in the high risk groups. Early and late survival rates for both OPCAB and ONCAB grafting are similar. Some studies suggest early poorer vein graft patency with off-pump when compared with on-pump, comparable midterm arterial conduit patency with no difference in long term venous and arterial graft patency. A recent, pooled analysis of randomised trials shows a reduction in stroke rates with use off-pump techniques. Furthermore, OPCAB grafting seems to reduce postoperative renal dysfunction, bleeding, transfusion requirement and respiratory complications while perioperative myocardial infarction rates are similar to ONCAB grafting. The high risk patient groups seem to benefit from off-pump coronary surgery.

Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in octogenarians

Enhanced life expectancy has confronted cardiac surgery with a rapidly growing population of octogenarians needing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Octogenarians are deemed a high-risk patient population with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality following conventional CABG using cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). In such patients reducing the invasiveness of the surgical procedure by avoiding CPB may be tried in an attempt to improve outcomes. The increasing performance of off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) grafting within certain centers reflects surgeon preference to avoid the inherent risks of CPB and cardioplegic arrest including hemodilution, nonpulsatile arterial flow, global myocardial ischemia, atherosclerotic embolization from aortic manipulation, and systemic inflammatory response. Although OPCAB grafting is a well-established surgical myocardial revascularization strategy, its actual benefits in terms of morbidity and mortality remain questionable in the general population. In the higher risk octogenarian patients, however, there is a potential for more tangible clinical benefits when CPB is avoided. This review article provides an overview of the impact of OPCAB grafting on postoperative mortality and morbidity in octogenarians.

Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG)-a 'personal' European perspective

Although popularised over two decades ago off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG) has seen a decrease in utilisation especially over the last decade. This has been due to publication of a number of trials which suggested inferior outcomes with OPCABG. However, the validity of the findings in these trials has been questioned on the basis of doubts over operator experience as witnessed by large numbers of cross-overs. Two more recent large randomised trials have shown very similar outcomes between on and off-pump surgery up to 1- and 5-year outcomes are imminently due. Furthermore several meta-analyses have reported that OPCABG reduces mortality, myocardial infarction and major morbidity in higher risk patients. Consequently there is a clear rationale for OPCABG in certain cohorts of patients and especially when combined with a no touch aortic technique in those with significant disease of the ascending aorta. The article discusses the importance of routine performance of OPCABG if it is to produce high quality results and especially in higher risk patients.

Outcomes of off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery in patients with severely dilated left ventricle

BACKGROUND

Currently, off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) grafting has been the standard procedure for surgical revascularization in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). This study aimed to examine the safety and applicability of OPCAB compared with on-pump coronary artery bypass (ONCAB) in patients with severely dilated left ventricle.

METHODS

A retrospective study of giant left ventricle patients [left ventricular end diastolic diameter (LVEDD) ≥ VE mm] undergoing coronary bypass grafting from 2009 through 2015 at a single center was conducted. Preoperative and intraoperative risk factors, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Survival analysis was carried to analyze survival rate during follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 24 patients underwent ONCAB, and 26 underwent OPCAB. Both groups had similar preoperative profiles. Two cases from each group died during in-hospital time. In comparison to OPCAB, there was longer operation and post-surgery intubation time and more renal dysfunction in ONCAB group (P<0.05). One-year survival between OPCAB and ONCAB were not significantly different (87.5% vs. 92.3%, P>0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

OPCAB is a safe and feasible alternative for CAD patients with giant left ventricle, offering a significant advantage over ONCAB with regards to renal function, operation duration and length of ventilation.

Cardiovascular Surgery in the Elderly

The elderly population is the fastest growing demographic in Western countries. As the population ages, the incidence of age-related comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, peripheral vascular disease, renal disease, cerebrovascular disease, and cardiovascular disease increases. With cardiovascular disease occurring in approximately one-quarter of the population over the age of 75 years and more than half of all cardiac procedures performed on this age group, the number of potential elderly surgical candidates is increasing. However, data suggest that old age is associated with increased morbidity and mortality following cardiac surgery. Over the past 2 decades, improvements in myocardial protection, extracorporeal circulation, anesthesia, and surgical techniques have significantly reduced the morbidity and mortality associated with cardiac surgery. Although most prospective studies exclude elderly patients, data from large retrospective studies and subgroup analyses suggest that cardiac surgery is a viable option for many elderly patients with cardiovascular disease, with good outcomes observed in reasonable-risk candidates; moreover, there are a growing number of available less-invasive options for them when surgical risk becomes prohibitive. In this article, we discuss the current state of cardiovascular surgery in the elderly as well as emerging technologies on the horizon.

Off-pump coronary artery bypass: past, present and future of a controversial technology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review will examine the current role of off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) surgery compared with on-pump coronary artery bypass (ONCAB) surgery for the revascularization of ischemic myocardium.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have confirmed earlier findings that OPCAB is associated with less grafts per patient and less complete revascularization, and increased incidence of recurrent angina and need for repeat revascularization procedures, and more frequent rehospitalization for cardiac-related issues. OPCAB does not prevent postoperative renal dysfunction and is associated with worse long-term outcomes. Hospital costs are not reduced and are increased in those OPCAB patients who require intraoperative conversion to ONCAB procedures; however, when multiple arterial grafts are used and a complete revascularization is performed, OPCAB outcomes are equivalent to those of ONCAB procedures.

SUMMARY

OPCAB should only be performed by surgeons experienced in this technique in patients in whom a complete revascularization can be achieved; preferably with multiple arterial grafts.

Single crossclamp: Safe training tool for coronary artery bypass grafting

OBJECTIVE

The single-crossclamp technique for coronary artery bypass grafting is recognized to reduce manipulation of the ascending aorta, and thereby improve neurological outcomes. However, there is a perceived disadvantage of long cardiopulmonary bypass and crossclamp times. Our objective was to evaluate outcomes with this technique and determine whether it is safe for training.

METHODS

Patients undergoing coronary artery bypass between October 2005 and February 2014 with use of the single-crossclamp method were divided into 2 groups: a consultant group (n = 1024), and a trainee group (n = 504), depending on the primary surgeon. Their outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

The consultants operated on more nonelective patients who had a higher risk profile (mean additive EuroSCORE I 4.05 vs. 3.80, p = 0.085; logistic EuroSCORE I 4.36 vs. 3.64, p = 0.002). There were 9 (0.9%) deaths in the consultant group and 5 (1%) in the trainee group. The mean number of grafts in the consultant group was greater, but the crossclamp time was similar and cardiopulmonary bypass time was shorter. There were 4 (0.4%) cerebrovascular events in the consultant group and 3 (0.6%) in the trainee group. Postoperative stay was shorter in the trainee group (7.19 vs. 7.97 days, p = 0.033). Other complication rates were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

The technique has excellent outcomes, especially neurological, and is safe for training junior surgeons.

Similarity of coagulation and inflammation despite different surgical revascularization strategies – a prospective randomized trial

Background:

Supposedly, minimized extracorporeal circulation or off-pump revascularization as alternatives to conventional extracorporeal circulation (ONCAB) reduce inflammation and coagulation disturbances.

Methods:

One hundred and twenty coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) patients were prospectively randomized for three surgical techniques. Coagulation and inflammation markers were measured up to 72 hours postoperatively.

Results:

Coagulation factors I, II, V, X, antithrombin III and C-reactive protein did not differ perioperatively between the groups and increased, as did several other markers, 12 to 72 hours postoperatively. Compared to its alternatives, ONCAB showed the most obvious transient increase in thrombin-antithrombin complexes (p<0.0001), D-dimers (p=0.0059), tissue factor pathway inhibitor (p=0.0005), factor VIII (p=0.0041) and tumor necrosis factor α (p=0.0300) during the operation and up to 12 hours postoperatively. Furthermore, ONCAB generated lower leukocyte and platelet counts and higher values of soluble P-selectin and soluble intercellular adhesion molecule 1 at some time points.

Conclusions:

With similarity in pivot coagulation factors, a specific detrimental influence of ONCAB on common coagulation pathways was excluded. Higher perioperative concentrations of products from the coagulation cascade most likely indicate activation of pericardial blood – recirculated only in ONCAB. Furthermore, with only temporary differences in markers of inflammation, the alternatives to ONCAB altogether were without advantage at 72 hours postoperatively. In the general answer to surgical trauma, the part of modern extracorporeal circulation is possibly overestimated. The study is registered at the German Clinical Trial Registry. Registration number DRKS00007580. URL: https://drks-neu.uniklinik-freiburg.de/drks_web/ URL: http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/

Plasma levels of growth differentiation factor-15 are associated with myocardial injury in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting

Growth differentiation factor-15 (GDF-15) has recently emerged as a risk predictor in patients with cardiovascular diseases. We therefore aimed to investigate the role of GDF-15 in the occurrence of cardiac injury during off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB). 55 consecutive patients with coronary artery diseases were recruited in this prospective, observational study. All patients were operated for OPCAB surgery. Serial blood samples were collected preoperatively, 12 hours and 36 hours after surgery. GDF-15, together with C-reactive protein, cardiac troponin I, creatine kinase MB and N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide levels in plasma were measured at each time-point. GDF-15 levels increased significantly at 12 hours after surgery, attaining nearly 2.5 times the baseline levels (p < 0.001). Postoperative GDF-15 levels correlated positively with cTnI (p = 0.003) and EuroSCORE II (p = 0.013). According to the ROC curves, postoperative plasma GDF-15 was found to be the best biomarker to predict perioperative cardiac injury, compared with cTnI, CK-MB and EuroSCORE II. Circulating GDF-15 is a promising novel biomarker for identifying perioperative myocardial injury in patients undergoing OPCAB.

Minimally invasive extracorporeal circulation improves quality of life after coronary artery bypass grafting

OBJECTIVES

The effect on postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery with conventional cardiopulmonary bypass (cCPB) and off-pump surgery has been investigated extensively; however, there are no studies focusing on HRQoL after surgery with minimally invasive extracorporeal circulation (MiECC). Therefore, we sought to prospectively investigate the effect of MiECC on postoperative HRQoL when compared with cCPB in patients undergoing CABG over a short-term (3-month) follow-up period.

METHODS

Sixty patients scheduled for elective CABG surgery were randomly assigned into two groups: those who had surgery on MiECC system (n = 30) and those who underwent CABG using cCPB (n = 30). Quality-of-life assessment was performed preoperatively (baseline-T0), at first postoperative month (T1) and at 3-month follow-up (T3). The RAND SF-36 scale was used for data collection, which included both sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of patients. The primary outcome of the study was quantitative measurement of postoperative HRQoL at 3-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Both groups were balanced in terms of demographic, socio-economic and operative characteristics. At 3-month follow-up, mean SF-36 component and summary scores in each group were higher in absolute values than the respective mean baseline scores, apart from role-physical score in patients operated with cCPB. Patients operated on MiECC showed uniformly significantly higher values in all individual and summary domains, whereas patients operated on cCPB showed significant improvement in 6/8 individual domains. Patients operated on MiECC showed a more pronounced increase in SF-36 individual domain scores from the first to the third postoperative month when compared with cCPB, which was statistically significant regarding physical functioning (P = 0.001), role-physical (P < 0.001), vitality (P = 0.01) and role-emotional (P = 0.004). This resulted in a significant improvement in physical (P = 0.002) and mental (P = 0.01) summary scores.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study proves that MiECC significantly improves HRQoL after coronary surgery compared with cCPB. This finding, combined with results from large-scale studies showing superior clinical outcomes from its use, enhances the role of MiECC as a dominant technique in coronary revascularization surgery.

Comparison between off- and on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: long-term results of a real-world registry

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare 5-year rates of overall death, cardiac-related death, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, stroke and new occurrence of postoperative renal failure in a large cohort of patients with coronary disease, treated with on- or off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

METHODS

Two propensity score-matched cohorts, each of 560 patients, undergoing isolated surgical coronary revascularization at the regional public and private centres of Emilia-Romagna region (Italy) over the period 1 January 2003 - 31 December 2013, were used to compare long-term outcomes of on-pump CABG (6711 patients) and off-pump CABG (597 patients).

RESULTS

The matched on-pump group received significantly more bypass grafts than the matched off-pump group (2.4 ± 1.1 vs 1.6 ± 0.9, P < 0.0001). The on-pump group reported statistically significant lower cardiac-related mortality. There was a trend towards higher overall mortality and the need for repeat revascularization procedures in the off-pump group. No difference was found for myocardial infarction, stroke or new occurrence of postoperative renal failure between groups in the follow-up. The multivariate analysis of significant predictors of mortality in the overall population confirmed that the off-pump revascularization strategy was an independent predictor of death at long-term follow-up. On-pump CABG reported significantly better results in terms of mortality in the subgroups of patients with a depressed left ventricular ejection fraction and in patients with three-vessel disease.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing elective isolated CABG, on-pump strategy conferred a long-term survival advantage compared with off-pump strategy, particularly for patients with more extensive coronary disease. No benefits were found in terms of reduction of postoperative morbidity with the off-pump strategy. On-pump surgery should be the preferred revascularization technique, and off-pump surgery reserved for patients for whom the perioperative risk of cardiopulmonary bypass is greater than the risk of a less complete coronary revascularization.

Short-term clinical outcomes after hybrid coronary revascularization versus off-pump coronary artery bypass for the treatment of multivessel or left main coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis

Background

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG) are both feasible, less invasive techniques for coronary revascularization. Although both techniques utilize the left internal mammary artery to left anterior descending artery graft, HCR uses drug-eluting stents instead of saphenous vein bypass. It remains unclear whether HCR is equal to, better or worse than OPCABG.

Methods and results

A meta-analysis was carried out using a random-effects model. Seven observational studies were included. There was no significant difference either in in-hospital mortality [relative risk (RR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13–2.59, P=0.47] or in the MACCE rate (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.24–1.64, P=0.34) between the HCR group and the OPCABG group. A significant difference was observed between the two groups in the length of hospitalization (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.13–0.97, P=0.01), length of ICU stay (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.10–0.80, P<0.05), intubation time (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.13–0.84, P<0.01), need for red blood transfusion (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.56–0.82, P<0.001), and total in-hospital costs (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.39–1.42, P<0.01).

Conclusion

Compared with OPCABG, HCR did not improve early survival but decreased the length of hospitalization, length of ICU stay, intubation time, and need for red blood transfusion, and increased total in-hospitalcosts.

The Evolution of Modern Cardiac Surgery and the Necessity to Change

This article depicts the Kit V. Arom Lecture, which was held at the 15th Annual Congress of the International Society for Minimally Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery in Berlin, Germany. It describes the evolution of modern cardiac surgery and the necessity for cardiac surgeons to change. The article is dedicated to a pioneer in minimally invasive cardiac surgery and a good friend, Kit V. Arom, MD.

Reviewing hybrid coronary revascularization: challenges, controversies and opportunities

Two main approaches to myocardial revascularization currently exist, coronary artery bypass and percutaneous coronary intervention. In patients with advanced coronary artery disease, coronary artery bypass surgery is associated with improved long term outcomes while percutaneous coronary intervention is associated with lower periprocedural complications. A new approach has emerged in the last decade that attempts to reap the benefits of bypass surgery and stenting while minimizing the shortcomings of each approach. This new approach, hybrid coronary revascularization, has shown encouraging early results. Minimally invasive techniques for bypass surgery have played a large part of bringing this approach into contemporary practice.

Revascularization in stable coronary artery disease: a combined perspective from an interventional cardiologist and a cardiac surgeon

It is now half a century since the start of coronary bypass graft surgery (CABG) with the first percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) following just over a decade later. The relative merits of PCI vs. CABG for stable coronary artery disease (stable-CAD) have continued to be debated ever since and have been the focus of around 20 randomized trials and numerous registry studies, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. The aim of this review is to identify areas of agreement, disagreement, and uncertainties in the role of PCI and CABG in patients with stable-CAD.

Improving quality and outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting procedures

The evolution in the approach, clinical care and outcomes of ischemic heart disease, has been dramatic over the past decade. Optimizing medical therapy initially and throughout the care delivery process has been transformative. The addition of new physiologic data to the traditional anatomic framework for diagnosis and therapy of more extensive stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) enables quality and outcomes improvements in this patient population overall and in the patient subsets of acute coronary syndrome and SIHD. In patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), these developments have changed the objective goal of surgical revascularization over this time interval. This review discusses the opportunities for quality and outcomes improvement in CABG, in the context of SIHD overall.

Is off-pump technique a safer procedure for coronary revascularization? A propensity score analysis of 20 years of experience

OBJECTIVES

We aim to describe our experience in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with or without cardiopulmonary bypass by comparing intraoperative and postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

From January 1993 to June 2013, 3097 patients underwent consecutive emergency and scheduled CABG surgery. A total of 1770 patients underwent on-pump CABG (ONCABG) and 1327 off-pump CABG (OPCABG). A propensity score matching was performed to identify appropriate matched-pair patients; univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess significant predictors of hospital and 30-day morbidity and mortality composite end-points. Morbidity composite end-point was defined as any renal, pulmonary, cardiovascular and neurological complication that occurred during hospital stay. We collected all-cause mortality data during the study period.

RESULTS

We identified 1004 patients in each group. There were no significant differences in thirty day mortality, 2.8 vs 3.8%, in OPCABG and ONCABG, respectively (P = 0.21). Cardiovascular, neurological, respiratory and renal complications were more frequent in the ONCABG group: 13.9 vs 8.7% (P < 0.001), 3.9 vs 2.2% (P = 0.03), 13.5 vs 7.5% (P < 0.001), 7.1 vs 5.3% (P = 0.095), respectively. The long-term all-cause mortality rate was 12.3 vs 12.9% in the OPCABG versus ONCABG group (P = 0.42), respectively. In both uni- and multivariable analysis preoperative renal failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and ONCABG were independent predictors of mortality and morbidity composite end-points.

CONCLUSIONS

OPCABG is associated with less postoperative morbimortality and shorter hospital and intensive care unit length of stay. ONCABG resulted as an independent predictor of morbidity and mortality composite end-point. No statistically significant differences were observed in long-term all-cause mortality between groups.

Femoro-acetabular impingement clinical research: is a composite outcome the answer?

Femoro-acetabular impingement (FAI) is increasingly recognized as an important cause of hip pain in the young adult. However, the methods of evaluating the efficacy of surgical intervention are often not validated and/or inconsistently reported. Important clinical, gait, radiographic and biomarker outcomes are discussed. This article (1) presents the rationale for considering a composite outcome for FAI patients; (2) examines a variety of important end points currently used to evaluate FAI surgery; (3) discusses a strategy to generate a composite outcome by combining these end points; and (4) highlights the challenges and current areas of controversy that such an approach to evaluating symptomatic FAI patients may present.

The current status of multi-arterial off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting

PURPOSE

Off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery has not become widespread because of its technical difficulty. However, especially in Asia, pioneer surgeons continue with efforts to develop the off-pump technique.

METHOD

By reviewing past studies, mainly retrospective single-center reports, an up-to-date profile of off-pump surgery was assembled.

RESULTS

Many of the past randomized trials failed to demonstrate the advantages of off-pump surgery. Although many of these were single-center retrospective studies, the data presented, mostly from world-famous surgeons, show that off-pump surgery does have advantages in high-risk patients and results in reduced rates of postoperative morbidity and equal rates of mortality in both the short- and long terms. Moreover, almost all experienced off-pump surgeons noted the benefit of multiple uses of arterial grafts, skeletonization harvesting of arterial conduits and the aorta no-touch technique.

CONCLUSION

The off-pump procedure has not become a standard technique performed by the average surgeon in daily practice. However, off-pump surgery will continue to provide a significant benefit to high-risk patients with coronary disease.