Efficacy of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting for the patients on chronic hemodialysis

Off-pump vs. on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with chronic kidney disease: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), cardiovascular disease is found to be the primary cause of mortality, and after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), their prognosis deteriorates.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis comparing off-pump CABG versus on-pump CABG in CKD patients. We searched electronic databases, including PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar, using relevant keywords. We included studies comparing off-pump CABG with on-pump CABG in patients with chronic kidney disease, which was defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 ml/min per 1.73 m2. Effect estimates were synthesized using a random-effects model and expressed as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Our primary outcome was short-term mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 25 studies, of which 23 were observational and 2 were RCTs, were included in this meta-analysis, comprising 234,585 patients (66,591 in the off-pump group and 167,994 in the on-pump group). Our meta-analysis showed that there was a significantly higher mortality rate in the on-pump CABG group as compared to the off-pump CABG group (RR: 0.73, 95% CI [0.61, 0.88]; P = 0.0006, I2 = 60%).

CONCLUSION

Compared with OPCAB, short-term mortality was significantly higher in ONCAB.

Hemodialysis vascular access affects heart function and outcomes: Tips for choosing the right access for the individual patient

Chronic kidney disease is associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. A well-functioning vascular access is associated with improved survival and among the available types of vascular access the arterio-venous (AV) fistula is the one associated with the best outcomes. However, AV access may affect heart function and, in some patients, could worsen the clinical status. This review article focuses on the specific cardiovascular hemodynamics of dialysis patients and how it is affected by the AV access; the effects of an excessive increase in AV access flow, leading to high-output heart failure; congestive heart failure in CKD patients and the contraindications to AV access; pulmonary hypertension. In severe heart failure, peritoneal dialysis (PD) might be the better choice for cardiac health, but if contraindicated suggestions for vascular access selection are provided based on the individual clinical presentation. Management of the AV access after kidney transplantation is also addressed, considering the cardiovascular benefit of AV access ligation compared to the advantage of having a functioning AVF as backup in case of allograft failure. In PD patients, who need to switch to hemodialysis, vascular access should be created timely. The influence of AV access in patients undergoing cardiac surgery for valvular or ischemic heart disease is also addressed. Cardiovascular implantable electronic devices are increasingly implanted in dialysis patients, but when doing so, the type and location of vascular access should be considered.

Comparative analysis of revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass surgery for patients with end-stage renal disease: a nationwide inpatient sample database

BACKGROUND

The role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and concomitant end-stage renal disease (ESRD) remains unknown.

RESEARCH DESIGN & METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample (NIS) (2002-2017) was queried to identify all cases of CAD and ESRD. The relative merits of PCI vs CABG were determined using a propensity-matched multivariate logistic regression model. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) for mortality and other in-hospital complications were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 350,623 [CABG = 112,099 (32%) and PCI = 238,524 (68%)] hospitalizations were included in the analysis. The overall adjusted odds for major bleeding (aOR 1.28, 95% CI 1.25-1.31, P < 0.0001), post-procedure bleeding (aOR 5.19, 95% CI 4.93-5.47, P < 0.0001), sepsis (aOR 1.29, 95% CI 1.26-1.33, P < 0.0001), cardiogenic shock (aOR 1.23, 95% CI 1.20-1.26, P < 0.0001), and in-hospital mortality (aOR 1.65, 95% CI 1.61-1.69, P < 0.0001) were significantly higher for patients undergoing CABG compared with PCI. The need for intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) placement (aOR 2.52, 95% CI 2.45-2.59, P < 0.001) was higher in the CABG group, while the adjusted odds of vascular complications were similar between the two groups (aOR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94-1.06, P = 0.82). As expected, patients undergoing CABG had a higher mean length of stay and mean cost of hospitalization.

CONCLUSION

CABG in ESRD may be associated with higher in-hospital complications, increased length of stay, and higher resource utilization.

Off-pump versus on-pump complete coronary artery bypass grafting: Comparison of the effects on the renal damage in patients with renal dysfunction

BACKGROUND

We aimed to compare off-pump technique with on-pump technique on renal function in patients with nondialysis-dependent renal dysfunction who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting.

METHODS

The 94 patients with renal dysfunction undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting were retrospectively analyzed. No patient was receiving dialysis. Patients were randomly assigned to conventional revascularization with cardiopulmonary bypass and beating heart. Both groups were compared in terms of renal dysfunction parameters and dialysis requirement. The logistic regression models were constructed to identify risk factors associated with dialysis requirement.

RESULTS

Renal dysfunction requiring dialysis developed in 9 patients in the on-pump group. The measures analysis of variance was performed on the data that showed worsening of renal function in the on-pump group compared with the off-pump group. Cardiopulmonary bypass is significant as independent predictor for the development of postoperative dialysis.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that off-pump coronary revascularization offers a superior renal protection and has a significantly lower risk for renal complications in patients with nondialysis-dependent renal dysfunction when compared with conventional coronary revascularization with cardiopulmonary bypass.

Comparison of outcomes between off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery in elderly patients: a meta-analysis

The aim of this study was to analyze if off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) is associated with better treatment outcomes in elderly patients (>70 years of age) than on-pump CABG, using meta-analysis. Medline, PubMed, Cochrane and Google Scholar databases were searched until September 13, 2016. Sensitivity and quality assessment were performed. Twenty-two studies, three randomized control trials (RCTs) and 20 non-RCTs were included with 24,127 patients. The risk of death associated with on-pump or off-pump CABG in the RCTs were similar (pooled OR=0.945, 95%CI=0.652 to 1.371, P=0.766). However, in the non-RCTs, mortality risk was lower in patients treated with off-pump CABG than on-pump CABG (pooled OR=0.631, 95%CI=0.587 to 0.944, P=0.003). No differences were observed between the two treatment groups in terms of the occurrence of 30-day post-operative stroke or myocardial infarction (P≥0.147). In the non-RCTs, off-pump CABG treatment was associated with a shorter length of hospital stay (pooled standardized difference in means=-0.401, 95%CI=-0.621 to -0.181, P≤0.001). The meta-analysis with pooled data from non-RCTs, but not RCTs, found that mortality was lower with off-pump compared with on-pump CABG, and suggested that there may be some benefit of off-pump CABG compared with on-pump CABG in the risk of mortality and length of hospital stay.

Impact of Chronic Kidney Insufficiency on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients that Undergo Coronary Revascularization: A Historical Review

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with poorer short and long-term cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Even after the commencement of haemodialysis in end stage renal failure patients, mortality exceeds 20% in the first year¹. More than 50% of these deaths are contributed by cardiovascular diseases (CVD), of which 20% are caused by acute myocardial infarction². Consequent to these findings, the degree and impact of coronary revascularization on CKD patients represents a clinical challenge, especially in the setting of advanced stages of CKD.

Management of coronary artery disease in end-stage renal disease

Despite a substantial number of patients with end-stage renal disease who have coronary artery disease, the comparative effectiveness of revascularization procedures such as coronary artery bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention remain unclear. Innovations in the field of coronary artery revascularization and concomitant changes in the standard of practice have improved outcomes in general. However, meaningful clinical decision-making remains difficult because it requires clinicians to extrapolate evidence derived from studies in the general population to patients with kidney disease for whom there is limited information from intervention trials. In non-randomized studies, this high-risk population for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality appear to derive substantial benefits from coronary revascularization. However, specific treatment decisions are often made based upon individual circumstances and contexts that are not well captured in these studies. This article reviews the available evidence, and its limitations, for deciding between various revascularization strategies for patients with end-stage renal disease. Several considerations that arise while making such decisions are discussed.

Impact of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery on postoperative renal dysfunction: current best available evidence

Renal dysfunction is a serious complication after coronary artery bypass surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. Cardiopulmonary bypass-related non-pulsatile flow, hypothermia, haemolysis, systemic inflammatory reactions and emboli are mentioned as possible causes for this postoperative renal dysfunction. In an attempt to avoid these deleterious effects of cardiopulmonary bypass, off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery has been rediscovered. Resurgence of interest in off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery is associated with the expectation that avoiding deleterious effects of the cardiopulmonary bypass leads to better outcomes and possibly decreased costs and resource use. We are currently practising in an era of evidence-based medicine that mandates the prospective randomized controlled trial as the most accurate tool for determining a treatment benefit compared with a control population. The present review article attempts to evaluate the current best available evidence from randomized controlled trials on the impact of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery on postoperative renal dysfunction.

On-pump versus off-pump coronary surgery outcomes in patients requiring dialysis: perspectives from a single center and the United States experience

OBJECTIVE

Coronary artery bypass graft surgery carries increased risk for patients requiring dialysis compared with other groups. Little data exist comparing outcomes of on-pump and off-pump techniques in dialysis patients. This study compares outcomes of bypass grafting in dialysis patients with these two techniques at a single institution and in the United States Renal Data System (USRDS) database.

METHODS

From March 1997 to April 2004, 37 patients requiring dialysis underwent bypass graft surgery at our institution. On-pump surgery was performed for 16 patients and off-pump surgery for 21. From January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2002, a total of 3922 patients in the USRDS underwent bypass graft surgery. On-pump surgery was performed for 3382 and off-pump surgery for 540. Comparisons were made between patients undergoing on-pump and off-pump bypass surgery with respect to demographics, risk factors, and outcomes. Univariate analysis, the Kaplan-Meier method, and a multivariate Cox model were used.

RESULTS

Institutional analysis revealed similar patient demographics, risk factors, use of thoracic artery grafts, and number of distal anastomoses. Outcome analysis was significant for less postoperative atrial fibrillation with the off-pump technique: 37.5% on-pump and 4.8% off-pump (P = .028). USRDS data revealed all-cause survivals at 1 and 18 months of 87.5% and 59.5% for on-pump versus 88.3% and 61.9% for off-pump procedures (P = .226). In a comorbidity-adjusted Cox model, off-pump bypass grafting was associated with a 16% reduction in all-cause mortality (P = .032).

CONCLUSION

Off-pump bypass grafting is uncommon in patients in the United States who require dialysis. Off- pump bypass grafting provides a morbidity benefit and is associated with a lower risk of death.

Does Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Improve Survival Among Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease?

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease remains the most frequent cause of death for patients with end-stage renal disease. To determine the long-term benefit of surgical revascularization in this high-risk population, we studied our patients with ESRD having coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG), comparing the results of off-pump to on-pump revascularization. As a baseline reference group, we used dialysis patients with a diagnosis of coronary artery disease who did not have surgical revascularization or percutaneous coronary interventions. The control group data set was obtained from the United States Renal Data System.

METHODS

From January 1995 through July 2003, 158 patients with end-stage renal disease who were on hemodialysis (excluding those in cardiogenic shock, needing resuscitation, and with emergent or salvage status) underwent CABG. Fifty-nine patients (37.3%) had off-pump revascularization, and 99 patients (62.7%) had bypass grafting utilizing extracorporeal circulation. Preoperative risk factors and operative results were analyzed, and longitudinal survival data obtained.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time was 39.1 months (median, 33.1) for the on-pump patients and 18.3 months (median, 14.7) for off-pump. The total number of anastomoses per off-pump patient was 2.4 +/- 1.0, and with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), it was 3.3 +/- 0.9 (p < 0.001). Patients revascularized off-pump had an operative mortality rate of 1.7%, whereas patients grafted using CPB had an operative mortality of 17.2% (p = 0.003). The predicted risk of mortality for the off-pump group (9.3% +/- 7.4%) was not statistically different from the on-pump cohort (9.1% +/- 7.7%, p = not significant). Logistic regression analysis indicates that CPB use was an independent risk factor for early death (p = 0.01, odds ratio = 13.6, 95% confidence interval: 1.7 to 110). Long-term follow-up demonstrated that the patients revascularized using CPB had improved survival compared with the off-pump patients and the control population.

CONCLUSIONS

Off-pump CABG improves early mortality rate when compared with conventional revascularization. Despite a greater operative mortality, however, long-term survival is improved in the patients revascularized with CPB as compared with the off-pump cohort, suggesting possible advantages from a more complete revascularization in this population.

Physiological comparison of off-pump and on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in patients on chronic hemodialysis

OBJECTIVES

Despite the long-term benefit, the operative results of conventional coronary artery bypass grafting for chronic hemodialysis patients remain unsatisfactory. The efficacy of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting for hemodialysis patients is yet to be determined. The purpose of this study was to investigate the postoperative physiology of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting for hemodialysis patients.

METHODS

Twenty-five hemodialysis cases who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting were reviewed. Fifteen of these patients underwent off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (off-group) and 10 underwent on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (on-group). Comparisons were made in cardiac function (cardiac index and stroke volume index), respiratory function (AaDO2), hemodialysis management (blood urea nitrogen, creatinine, right atrial pressure, pulmonary wedge pressure), and bleeding tendency (postoperative blood loss and blood transfusion).

RESULTS

There was no operative mortality, but 3 major postoperative complications occurred (2 sternal wound infections in the off-group and 1 pneumonia in the on-group). There was no difference in cardiac index or stroke volume index. AaDO2 was significantly lower in the off-group. Plasma concentrations of blood urea nitrogen and creatinine were similar between groups. Right atrial pressure was lower and pulmonary wedge pressure tended to be lower in the off-group. Postoperative bleeding and blood transfusion were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

Our study confirmed that off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting is feasible for hemodialysis patients. Physiologic data showed that off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting might be effective in preserving postoperative lung oxygenation.

Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with renal dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Renal dysfunction is a predictor of increased morbidity and mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting, whether it is dialysis-dependent or not. Several studies have shown the efficacy of off-pump technique in reducing morbidity and mortality in patients with renal dysfunction. However, the actual effect of renal dysfunction in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting has not been well understood.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of 402 consecutive patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting from April 2001 to June 2003. Sixty-eight patients had chronic renal dysfunction (group A); 19 patients were dialysis-dependent; 334 patients had normal renal function (group B). Operative variables, morbidity, and mortality were compared between the two groups. Furthermore, multivariable analysis was performed to identify predictors for short-term survival.

RESULTS

Preoperative characteristics were similar in the two groups. Blood transfusion rate was higher in group A than group B (57.4% and 25.7%, respectively; p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was similar (1.5% and 1.2% in group A and B, respectively; p = 0.853). Multivariable analysis revealed that unstable angina, low ejection fraction, peripheral vascular disease and redo surgery are significant risk factors for poor early result of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

CONCLUSIONS

Early outcomes of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with renal dysfunction were comparable to those in patients with normal renal function. Renal dysfunction is not a predictor of poor early outcomes after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

Early results of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting for patients on chronic renal dialysis

OBJECTIVE

Renal dialysis is one of the independent risk factors for coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) may become a good option for these patients. In this study, early results as well as surgical techniques of OPCAB in dialysis patients were analyzed compared with non-dialysis patients.

METHODS

Between July 1997 and December 2002, 471 consecutive patients who underwent OPCAB were enrolled in this study. Among them, 20 patients (4.2%) had received hemodialysis regularly for more than 3 months until the operation. Severity of coronary artery disease or clinical presentations had no significant difference, however, left ventricular function was significantly impaired in dialysis patients.

RESULTS

The average number of anastomosis was 2.8 +/- 1.0 in the dialysis group and 3.2 +/- 1.0 in the non-dialysis group (p=0.056). Twelve patients (60.0%) received 3 or more bypass grafts in the dialysis group. Among them, 6 patients were revascularized only by in-situ or composite arterial conduits using bilateral internal thoracic arteries with or without the gastroepiploic artery. No patients required aortic clamping in the dialysis group. There was no mortality or morbidity in dialysis patients. Perioperaitve bleeding and mechanical ventilation time in the intensive care unit was similar in both groups. No dialysis patients required prolonged mechanical ventilation and hemodialysis from the beginning of the operation to extubation.

CONCLUSION

The rationale for OPCAB for dialysis patients has been established. Total arterial revascularization without aortic clamping is applicable for dialysis patients who require multivessel bypass grafts.