Off-pump surgery for the poor ventricle?

Off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery outcomes in patients with severe left ventricle dysfunction: inverse probability weighted study

Objective

In this study we aimed to compare on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) outcomes in patients presented with low left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) as a high-risk group of patients.

Methods

In this registry-based study from 2014 and 2016, all patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction (EF less than 35%) were included and followed until 2020. The median follow-up period was 47.83 [38.41, 55.19] months. Off pump CABG (OPCABG) was compared with on-pump CABG (ONCABG) in terms of mid-term non-fatal cardiovascular events (CVEs) and all-cause mortality. Propensity score method (with inverse probability weighting technique) was used to compare these two groups.

Results

From 14,237 patients who underwent isolated CABG, 2055 patients with EF ≤ 35% were included; 1705 in ONCABG and 350 patients in OPCABG groups. Although OPCABG was associated with lower risk of 30-days mortality (Odds Ratio [OR]: 0.021; Confidence Interval [CI] 95% [0.01, 0.05], P < 0.001); there was no significant difference between OPCABG and ONCABG in term of mid-term mortality and non-fatal CVEs ((Hazard ratio [HR]: 0.822; 95%CI [0.605, 1.112], p = 0.208) and (HR: 1.246; 95%CI [0.805, 1.929], p = 0.324), respectively). Patients with more than three traditional coronary artery disease risk factors, had more favorable outcomes (in terms of mid-term mortality) if underwent OPCABG (HR: 0.420; 95%CI [0.178, 0.992], p = 0.048).

Conclusion

OPCABG was associated with lower risk of 30-days mortality; however, mid-term outcomes were comparable in both OPCABG and ONCABG techniques.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12872-022-02895-0.

Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting is safe and effective in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction

OBJECTIVES

Severe left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) is associated with increased risk following coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Due to a dearth of reports on the choice of CABG technique in patients with LVD, this study aims to compare the outcomes of off-pump CABG (OPCAB) and conventional CABG (ONCAB) in such patients.

METHODS

Retrospective single-centre propensity-matched analysis comparing early- and long-term outcomes of OPCAB and ONCAB in patients with severe LVD. Primary outcome was long-term all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Between 2002 and 2014, a total of 1161 consecutive patients with severe LVD underwent isolated CABG [442 patients underwent OPCAB and 719 ONCAB (430 matched pairs)]. Incomplete revascularization was observed more frequently among OPCAB than ONCAB patients (35.3% vs 21.6%; P < 0.01). The overall 30-day mortality was 5% and was comparable between the matched groups [OR 0.64 (0.34-1.22); P = 0.18]. OPCAB patients had shorter median hospital stay (11 vs 12 days; P = 0.02) and lower packed red blood cell transfusion rates [2.7 (2.21-3.19) vs 4.4 (3.56-5.24); P < 0.01]. Estimated adjusted survival was 86.0% vs 85.8%, 69.1% vs 65.5% and 59.9% vs 49.1% at 1, 5 and 10 years for OPCAB and ONCAB patients, respectively (P = 0.99). Long-term risk of mortality was similar between groups [hazard ratio (HR) 0.94 (0.66-1.32); P = 0.7]. Incomplete revascularization was weakly associated with increased risk of long-term all-cause mortality [HR 1.33 (0.99-1.77); P = 0.05].

CONCLUSIONS

OPCAB is safe and effective in patients with severe LVD. Although incomplete revascularization is more commonly observed in patients undergoing OPCAB, it is not associated with increased late mortality.

Feasibility of off-pump coronary artery grafting for patients with impaired left ventricular ejection fraction: A retrospective cohort study from a single institutional database

OBJECTIVE

Despite substantial advances in surgical practice, the management of patients with impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains challenging. Furthermore, evidence on the outcomes of off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) surgery in this population is inconsistent. We conducted the present study to compare the short- and long-term outcomes of OPCAB in patients with different ejection fractions.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used data from the Hua-Shan Cardiac Surgery and included consecutive patients aged ≥ 18 years who underwent OPCAB procedures during 2016-2019. The patients included in the study were followed up until death or the end of data collection. Patients with different ejection fractions were matched 1:2 using propensity score matching. Factors associated with short-term outcomes were determined using logistic regression, and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses for the differences in all-cause death were generated.

RESULTS

The two propensity score matched groups consisted of 40 left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) and 80 normal left ventricular function (NLVF) patients. No significant intergroup differences were observed in the postoperative outcomes for the occurrence of left heart failure (22.5% in LVD vs. 5.0% in NLVF, p = .009). Age (odds ratio = 1.11, 95% confidence interval = 1.04-1.18) but not the preoperative LVEF was shown to be a strong predictor of short-term events in logistic regression analyses. Kaplan-Meier curves displayed similar freedom from all-cause death (p = .119) or cardio-death (p = .092) between groups.

CONCLUSION

The immediate postoperative outcomes and long-term outcomes were similar between the groups, indicating that OPCAB is a safe and effective choice for patients with LVD.

Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting for patients with severely reduced ventricular function-A justified strategy?

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Low ejection fraction (EF) has been identified as a main risk factor for perioperative complications and mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and early as well as midterm outcomes of off-pump CABG (OPCAB) and conventional CABG (ONCAB) surgery in patients with reduced EF.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patient demographics, preoperative risk factors, operative and postoperative outcomes of patients with left ventricular EF (LV-EF) ≤35%, who underwent CABG at our institution between January 2015 and December 2017. Propensity score and multivariate logistic regression analysis were used to compare risk adjusted outcomes between groups.

RESULTS

Overall, 111 consecutive CABG-patients with LV-EF ≤ 35% underwent either ONCAB (46 patients, 41.4%) or OPCAB surgery (65 patients, 58.6%). There was no difference in early mortality (5% vs. 7.5%, p = .64) between groups. After propensity score matching, OPCAB-patients required significantly less re-sternotomies for bleeding (20% vs. 2.5%, p = .03) and consequently received significantly less blood transfusions (57.5% vs. 32.5%, p = .03). Fewer OPCAB-patients experienced low cardiac output syndrome (22.5% vs. 42.5%, p = .06) and suffered from postoperative delirium (22.5% vs. 42.5%, p = .06). There were no differences in completeness of revascularization between groups (median 1 (1.0-1.33; 1.0-1.33) OPCAB versus median 1 (1-1.33; 0.67-2) ONCAB, p = .95). Survival after 6 months, one year and three years was similar for ONCAB- and OPCAB-patients (ONCAB 92.3%, 89.4%, and 89.4% vs. OPCAB 89.8%, 85.7%, and 82.1%; p = .403). More ONCAB-patients needed a coronary re-intervention during follow-up (8.6% vs. 2.3%, p = .402).

CONCLUSION

OPCAB-surgery is a safe and effective option for patients with reduced EF. Furthermore, it does not come at the expense of less complete revascularization or increased coronary re-intervention during early follow-up.

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.

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.

Coronary artery surgery in octogenarians: evolving strategies for the improvement in early and late results

The purpose of this study was to investigate retrospectively early and late outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in a large series of octogenarians. We retrospectively reviewed the data of 241 octogenarian patients who underwent CABG between April 2002 and April 2009 at our institution. Mean age was 84.7 ± 1.8 years. Patients affected by concomitant coexistent organic aortic, mitral, or tricuspid valve disease were excluded from the study. Patients with functional secondary ischemic mitral incompetence were included in the study. The majority of the patients were male. Angina pectoris functional class III/IV accounted for 164 patients (68%). Left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% was diagnosed in 38 patients (15.8%). Early mortality rate was 5.8% (14 patients). Causes of death were cardiac related in 10 patients. Preoperative independent predictors of in-hospital mortality obtained with multivariate analysis were extracardiac arteriopathy, New York Heart Association class III/IV, and previous percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA). The overall mean follow-up was 41.6 ± 25.9 months (range 1-87.6 months). Among the 222 contacted survivors, there were 16 (7.2%) deaths during the follow-up. The actuarial survival was 91.9% at 1 year and 83.5% at 5 years. On multivariate analysis, time to late death was adversely affected by preoperative extracardiac arteriopathy and previous PTCA. Advanced age alone should not be a deterrent for CABG if it has been determined that the benefits outweigh the potential risk. A careful selection of optimal candidates, based on the evaluation of their systemic comorbidities, appears mandatory in order to obtain the greatest benefit for these high-risk patients.