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

A meta-analysis of large randomized trials for mid-term major cardio- and cerebrovascular events following off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting

To determine whether off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) increases mid-term major adverse cardiovascular (and cerebrovascular) events MACCE over on-pump CABG, we performed a meta-analysis of exclusive large randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched through October 2013 using Web-based search engines (PubMed and OVID). Eligible studies were RCTs of off-pump vs on-pump CABG enrolling >100 patients in each procedure and reporting MACCE at the time of >1 year follow-up. Mixed-effects meta-regression analyses were performed to determine whether the effects of off-pump CABG on MACCE were modulated by the prespecified factors. Eight RCTs enrolling 10 954 patients were identified and included. A pooled analysis demonstrated no statistically significant difference in off-pump and on-pump CABG (hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 0.93-1.29; P = 0.27). In general, exclusion of any single study from the analysis did not substantially alter the overall result of our analysis. There was no evidence of significant publication bias. Meta-regression coefficients were not statistically significant for mean age, proportion of men and that of diabetes. In conclusion, off-pump CABG appears not to increase mid-term MACCE over on-pump CABG.

Systematic review of robotic-assisted, totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting

BACKGROUND

Advancements in surgical robotic technology over the last two decades have enabled coronary artery bypass grafting to be performed totally endoscopically, and have the potential to significantly change clinical practice in the future.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies reporting clinical outcomes of total endoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting (TECABG) was performed.

RESULTS

14 appraised studies included 880 beating heart TECABGs, 360 arrested heart TECABGs, 633 one-vessel operations and 357 two-vessel operations. Patients were generally low-risk. There was a significant learning curve. The weighted means for short-term beating heart and arrested heart TECABG results respectively were: intraoperative exclusion rate of 5.7% and 1.9%, intraoperative conversion rate of 5.6% and 15.0%, all-cause mortality of 1.2% and 0.4%, stroke of 0.7% and 0.8%, myocardial infarction of 0.8% and 1.8%, new onset atrial fibrillation of 10.7% and 5.1% and post-operative reintervention rate of 2.6% and 2.3%. The overall rate of short term postoperative graft patency for beating heart and arrested heart TECABG was 98.3% and 96.4% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Appropriate patient selection was important in minimizing the risk of intraoperative and postoperative complications. Short-term outcomes of both beating and arrested heart TECABG were acceptable, but results so far have been heterogeneous. There were fewer studies reporting intermediate to long-term outcomes, but results were encouraging, and further investigation and development of the procedure is warranted.

On-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery: what is the status after ROOBY, DOORS, CORONARY and GOPCABE?

Off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery has been purported to be safer than conventional coronary artery bypass surgery performed using cardiopulmonary bypass. This theory was supported by a number of early series, but failed to be confirmed by a number of small, randomized, controlled trials. Conversely, it has been suggested that revascularization after off-pump surgery is associated with fewer grafts and lower graft patency, potentially leading to a higher risk of cardiovascular morbidity and need for repeated coronary interventions. Since 2009, four major randomized controlled trials have been published, increasing the level of evidence significantly.