Acute clinical and financial outcomes of on- versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in octogenarians

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery bypass surgery in octogenarians is associated with increased postoperative morbidity. Off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery eliminates potential complications of cardiopulmonary bypass, but its use remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and financial impact of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery compared to conventional coronary artery bypass surgery among this high-risk population.

METHODS

Patients ≥80 years undergoing first-time, isolated, elective coronary artery bypass surgery were identified using the 2010-2019 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Patients were grouped into off-pump or conventional coronary artery bypass surgery cohorts. Multivariable models were developed to assess the independent associations between off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery and key outcomes.

RESULTS

Of ∼56,158 patients, 13,940 (24.8%) underwent off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery. On average, the off-pump cohort was more likely to undergo single-vessel bypass (37.3 vs 19.7%, P < .001). After adjustment, undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery was associated with similar odds of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.73-1.12) relative to conventional bypass. Additionally, the off-pump and conventional coronary artery bypass surgery groups were comparable in odds of postoperative stroke (adjusted odds ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval 0.78-1.35), cardiac arrest (adjusted odds ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.71-1.37), ventricular fibrillation (adjusted odds ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.60-1.31), tamponade (adjusted odds ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval 0.74-1.97), and cardiogenic shock (adjusted odds ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval 0.75-1.17). However, the off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery cohort was linked with an increased likelihood of ventricular tachycardia (adjusted odds ratio 1.23, 95% confidence interval 1.01-1.49) and myocardial infarction (adjusted odds ratio 1.34, 95% confidence interval 1.16-1.55). Furthermore, those undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery demonstrated reduced odds of non-home discharge (adjusted odds ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.83-0.99) and a decrement in hospitalization expenditures ($-1,290, 95% confidence interval -$2,370 to $200).

CONCLUSION

Off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery was linked with increased odds of ventricular tachycardia and myocardial infarction, but no difference in mortality. Our findings point to the safety of conventional coronary artery bypass surgery in octogenarians. Yet, future work is needed to consider long-term outcomes in this complex surgical cohort.

Immediate Results after Multiple Arterial Grafts in Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery in the São Paulo State: Cross Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The short-term results after using arterial grafts still raise questions and doubts for medical society.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the immediate outcomes of patients undergoing single arterial graft versus multiple arterial grafts coronary artery bypass grafting surgery.

METHODS

Cross-sectional cohort study in the São Paulo Registry of Cardiovascular Surgery II (REPLICCAR II). Perioperative data from 3122 patients were grouped by the number of arterial grafts used, and their outcomes were compared: reoperation, deep sternal wound infection (DSWI), stroke, acute kidney injury, prolonged intubation (>24 hours), short hospital stay (<6 days), prolonged hospital stay (>14 days), morbidity and mortality. Propensity Score Matching (PSM) matched 1062 patients, adjusted for the mortality risk.

RESULTS

After PSM, the single arterial graft group showed patients with advanced age, more former smokers, hypertension, diabetes, stable angina, and previous myocardial infarction. In the multiple arterial grafts, there was a predominance of males, recent pneumonia, and urgent surgeries. After the procedure, there was a higher incidence of pleural effusion (p=0.042), pneumonia (p=0.01), reintubation (p=0.006), DSWI (p=0.007), and sternal debridement (p=0.015) in the multiple arterial grafts group, however, less need for blood transfusion (p=0.005), extremity infections (p=0.002) and shorter hospital stays (p=0.036). Bilateral use of the internal thoracic artery was not related to increased DSWI rate, but glycosylated hemoglobin >6.40% (p=0.048).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing the multiarterial technique had a higher incidence of pulmonary complications, and DSWI, where glycosylated hemoglobin ≥6.40%, had a greater influence on the infectious outcome than the choice of grafts.

Comparison of the internal thoracic artery flow dissected by video endoscopy or conventional technique

Purpose:

To compare the blood flow in the internal thoracic artery when dissected endoscopically in a conventional manner, in addition to develop a reliable experimental training model for the surgical team.

Methods:

Paired experimental study. Ten pigs were operated and had both internal thoracic arteries dissected, the right with a conventional technique and the left by video endoscopy. The main outcomes to be studied were flow, length, and time of dissection of each vessel.

Results:

Blood flow measurements were performed with mean heart rate of 100 ± 16 bpm and mean arterial pressure of 89.7 ± 13 mm Hg. The mean blood flow of endoscopic dissection of the internal thoracic artery was 170.2 ± 66.3 mL/min and by direct view was 180.8 ± 70.5 (p = 0.26). Thus, there was no statistically significant difference between the flows, showing no inferiority between the methods.

Conclusions:

The minimally invasive dissection of the internal thoracic artery was shown to be not inferior to the dissection by open technique in relation to the blood flow in the present experimental model. In addition, the model that we replicated was shown to be adequate for the development of the learning curve and improvement of the endoscopic abilities.

Multiarterial coronary grafting using the radial artery as a second arterial graft: how far does the survival benefit extend?

OBJECTIVES

Despite the 10-year results of the Arterial Revascularization Trial, the controversy regarding the survival benefit of multiarterial grafting (MAG) remains. Our goal was to present our long-term survival data in this propensity-matched observational study.

METHODS

A primary unmatched population of 4303 patients with first-time isolated coronary artery bypass grafts operated on between 2000 and 2018 were included. A total of 1187 post-matched patients were compared with matched controls. Multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard analyses were undertaken to assess the contribution of MAG and other covariates to the long-term survival of unmatched and propensity-matched populations.

RESULTS

MAG was associated with increased median survival in both the unmatched and the matched groups; difference: 962 and 1459 days, log-rank tests; P = 0.029 and 0.0004, respectively. MAG was associated with a reduced hazard of death in the unmatched as well as in the matched groups: hazard ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.72 (0.62-0.83); P < 0.0001 and 0.75 (0.64-0.88); P ≤ 0.0001, respectively. In the matched group, the prosurvival factors were low logistic EuroSCORE, obesity, no intra-aortic balloon pump, an ejection fraction >30%, age 50-69 years, operation by an experienced surgeon, with and without diabetes, on-pump surgery and 3 distal anastomoses. In a cohort of 242 late-presenting patients with reinfarction or recurrent angina, both MAG and control populations were associated with reduced median survival; median (95% CI): MAG: 3026 (1138-3503); control: 3035 (2134-3991), log-rank P = 0.217 with superior patency of the left internal mammary artery but no difference between radial artery and saphenous vein grafts.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiarterial revascularization, especially using the radial artery as a second arterial conduit, is associated with a significant survival benefit and a lack of in-hospital morbidity.

Survival effect of radial artery usage in addition to bilateral internal thoracic arterial grafting: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Little evidence shows whether the radial artery (RA) as third arterial graft provides superior outcomes compared with the use of the bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) and saphenous vein (SV) graft in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. A meta-analysis of propensity score-matched observational studies that compared the long-term outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting with the use of BITA and the RA (BITA + RA) versus BITA and SV (BITA + SV) was performed.

METHODS

Electronic databases from January 2000 to November 2020 were screened. Studies that reported long-term mortality were analyzed. The primary outcome was long-term overall mortality. A secondary end point was in-hospital/30-day mortality. Pooled hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for survival and time-to-event analysis according to a random effect model. Differences were expressed as odds ratio with 95% CI for in-hospital/30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Six propensity score-matched studies that reported on 2500 matched patients (BITA + RA: 1250; BITA + SV: 1250) were identified for comparison. The use of BITA + RA was not statistically associated with early mortality (odds ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.36-2.28; P = .83). The mean follow-up time ranged from 7.5 to 12 years. The pooled analysis of long-term survival revealed a significant difference between the 2 groups favoring BITA + RA treatment (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.50-0.91; P = .031). The survival rate for BITA + RA versus BITA + SV at 5, 10, and 15 years were: 96.2% versus 94.8%, 88.9% versus 87.4%, and 83% versus 77.9%, respectively (log rank test, P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with coronary artery bypass grafting, BITA + RA usage is not associated with higher rates of operative risk and is associated with superior long-term overall survival.

Preclinical Feasibility and Patency Analyses of a New Distal Coronary Connector: The ELANA Heart Bypass

Objective

This preclinical study determines the feasibility and 6-month patency rates of a new distal coronary connector, the Excimer Laser Assisted Nonocclusive Anastomosis (ELANA) Heart Bypass.

Methods

Twenty Dutch Landrace pigs received either a hand-sewn (n = 8) or an ELANA (n = 12) left internal thoracic artery to left anterior descending artery anastomosis, using off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Six-month patency rates were demonstrated by coronary angiography and histological evaluation. Throughout, procedural details and complication rates were collected.

Results

The ELANA Heart Bypass demonstrated 0% mortality and complication rates during follow-up. It was demonstrated feasible, with comparable perioperative flow measurements (ELANA vs hand-sewn, median [min to max], 24 [14 to 28] vs 17 [12 to 31] mL/min; P = 0.601) and fast construction times (3 [3 to 7] vs 31 [26 to 37] min; P < 0.001). Yet, an extra hemostatic stitch was needed in 25% of the ELANA versus 12.5% of the hand-sewn anastomoses. The 6-month patency rate of the ELANA Heart Bypass was 83.3% versus 100% in hand-sewn anastomoses. The 2 occluded ELANA-anastomoses were defined model-based errors.

Conclusions

The ELANA Heart Bypass facilitates a sutureless distal coronary anastomosis. A design change is suggested to improve hemostasis and will be evaluated in future translational studies. This new technique is a potential alternative to hand-sewn anastomoses in (minimally invasive) coronary surgery.

Elevated postoperative serum uric acid is associated with major adverse events following coronary artery bypass grafting

BACKGROUND

Few data are available on the association between postoperative serum uric acid (SUA) level and poor survival in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We evaluated the relationship between postoperative SUA and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) among patients undergoing CABG.

METHODS

This study used data from 1614 consecutive patients undergoing CAGB at Fuwai Hospital (Beijing, China) from 2011 to 2015. Patients were stratified into statistical quartiles of postoperative SUA (between 6 and 18 hours after cardiac surgery): less than 203.7, 203.7 to 254.1, 254.1 to 316.6, and ≥316.6 µmol/L. The association of postoperative SUA with MACCE (ie, death, myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, or repeat revascularization) and the composite endpoint of mortality/MI were assessed.

RESULTS

Patients had a mean age of 60.3 ± 8.4 years, and 79.3% were male. During mean follow-up of 2.5 ± 0.7 years, MACCE occurred in 201 (12.5%) patients. In separate multivariable regression models, postoperative SUA level was positively associated with in-hospital MACCE (highest vs lowest SUA quartile: odds ratio [OR]: 2.40; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.29, 4.48; P = .006) and in-hospital composite endpoint of mortality/MI (OR: 2.88; 95% CI: 1.45, 5.72; P = .003), respectively. And elevated postoperative SUA level was independently associated with MACCE (Hazard ratio [HR]: 1.70; 95% CI: 1.12, 2.57; P = .01) and the composite endpoint of mortality/MI (HR: 2.42; 95% CI: 1.32, 4.43; P = .004) respectively within 3 years after CABG.

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated postoperative SUA level is associated with poor clinical outcomes after CABG. Patients with high postoperative SUA levels after CABG might require to be closely monitored.

Pivotal contemporary trials of percutaneous coronary intervention vs. coronary artery bypass grafting: a surgical perspective

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are the two revascularization strategies for patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). While CABG continues to be the gold standard for revascularization, advancements in PCI technology have triggered numerous, often industry-funded investigations to challenge this role. This perspective will provide a summary of previous RCTs comparing CABG vs. PCI. The recently published NOBLE and EXCEL trials will be discussed in depth. Future directions of research pertaining to CABG vs. PCI will be briefly discussed in this document.

Cardiac surgery 2017 reviewed

For the year 2017, more than 21,000 published references can be found in PubMed when entering the search term "cardiac surgery". This review focusses on conventional cardiac surgery, considering the new interventional techniques only if they were directly compared to classic techniques but also entails aspects of perioperative intensive care management. The publications last year provided a plethora of new and interesting information that helped to quantify classic surgical treatment effects and provided new guidelines for the management of structural heart disease, which made comparisons to interventional techniques easier. The field of coronary bypass surgery was primarily filled with confirmatory evidence for the beneficial role of coronary artery bypass grafting for complex coronary disease and equal outcomes for percutaneous coronary intervention for less complex disease including main stem lesions. For aortic valve treatment, the new guidelines provide an equal recommendation for surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement for high and intermediate risk giving specific check lists to individualize decision-making by the heart team. For low-risk aortic stenosis, surgical valve replacement remains the primary indication. For the mitral valve, the importance of surgical experience of the individual surgeon on short- and long-term outcome was presented and the prognostic impact of mitral repair for primary mitral regurgitation was emphasized. In addition, there were many relevant and interesting other contributions from the purely operative arena in the fields of tricuspid disease as well as terminal heart failure (i.e., transplantation and ventricular assist devices). While this article attempts to summarize the most pertinent publications, it does not have the expectation of being complete and cannot be free of individual interpretation. As in recent years, it provides a condensed summary that is intended to give the reader "solid ground" for up-to-date decision-making in cardiac surgery.