Long-Term Effect of Dual Antiplatelet Treatment after Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

Single Versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting for Unprotected Left-Main Coronary Disease

BACKGROUND

The use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after coronary revascularization for left-main disease is still debated. The study aimed to characterize patients who received dual versus single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for unprotected left-main disease and compare the outcomes of those patients.

RESULTS

This multicenter retrospective cohort study included 551 patients who were grouped into 2 groups: patients who received SAPT (n = 150) and those who received DAPT (n = 401). There were no differences in age ( P = 0.451), gender ( P = 0.063), smoking ( P = 0.941), diabetes mellitus ( P = 0.773), history of myocardial infarction ( P = 0.709), chronic kidney disease ( P = 0.615), atrial fibrillation ( P = 0.306), or cerebrovascular accident ( P = 0.550) between patients who received SAPT versus DAPT. DAPTs were more commonly used in patients with acute coronary syndrome [87 (58%) vs. 273 (68.08%); P = 0.027], after off-pump CABG [12 (8%) vs. 73 (18.2%); P = 0.003] and in patients with radial artery grafts [1 (0.67%) vs. 32 (7.98%); P < 0.001]. While SAPTs were more commonly used in patients with low ejection fraction [55 (36.67%) vs. 61 (15.21%); P < 0.001] and in patients with postoperative acute kidney injury [27 (18%) vs. 37 (9.23%); P = 0.004]. The attributed treatment effect of DAPT for follow-up major adverse cerebrovascular and cardiac events was not significantly different from that of SAPT [β, -2.08 (95% confidence interval (CI), -20.8-16.7); P = 0.828]. The attributed treatment effect of DAPT on follow-up all-cause mortality was not significantly different from that of SAPT [β, 4.12 (CI, -11.1-19.32); P = 0.595]. There was no difference in bleeding between groups ( P = 0.666).

CONCLUSIONS

DAPTs were more commonly used in patients with acute coronary syndrome, after off-pump CABG, and with radial artery grafts. SAPTs were more commonly used in patients with low ejection fraction and acute kidney injury. Patients on DAPT after CABG for left-main disease had comparable major adverse cerebrovascular and cardiac events and survival to patients on SAPT, with no difference in bleeding events.

Guidelines for enhanced recovery after cardiac surgery. Consensus document of Spanish Societies of Anesthesia (SEDAR), Cardiovascular Surgery (SECCE) and Perfusionists (AEP)

The ERAS guidelines are intended to identify, disseminate and promote the implementation of the best, scientific evidence-based actions to decrease variability in clinical practice. The implementation of these practices in the global clinical process will promote better outcomes and the shortening of hospital and critical care unit stays, thereby resulting in a reduction in costs and in greater efficiency. After completing a systematic review at each of the points of the perioperative process in cardiac surgery, recommendations have been developed based on the best scientific evidence currently available with the consensus of the scientific societies involved.

Anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy post coronary artery bypass surgery

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the gold standard treatment for patients with multivessel coronary heart disease. Although its use has proven long-term survival benefits, there is a relative degree of graft failure which increases morbidity and mortality rates.

DISCUSSION

This review discusses clinical outcomes following antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy after CABG. There is wide variation of evidence about the use of clopidogrel or ticagrelor to aspirin postoperatively in relation to improving graft patency rates or clinical outcomes over the use of aspirin alone. These dual therapies may have significant protective effects in patients undergoing off-pump CABG. Recent studies suggest that superior outcomes may be attained by combining prasugrel with aspirin. Further research is needed to evaluate this, as well as compare the effectiveness of different dual antiplatelet regimens. There is weak evidence for post-CABG anticoagulation, with warfarin and rivaroxaban providing no protection against graft failure but decreasing long-term major adverse cardiac events. Anticoagulation seems to be indicated only in post-CABG patients at high risk of future ischemic events.

CONCLUSION

The use of dual anti-platelet therapy post coronary artery bypass surgery needs further research. Potentially, selective patient groups will benefit more from the addition of thienopyridine antiplatelets or anticoagulants to aspirin after CABG.

Is administration of dual-antiplatelet therapy beneficial for patients following off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting?

A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether administration of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) following off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) would improve postoperative clinical outcomes or minimize the incidence of postoperative graft failure. In total, 101 papers were found using the reported search, 14 of which represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. One meta-analysis and 3 randomized controlled trials showed that DAPT following OPCAB is associated with decreased incidence of saphenous vein graft occlusion. One randomized controlled trial and 4 observational studies showed no effect of DAPT on mortality following OPCAB, whereas 3 observational studies showed that DAPT decreased mortality. One meta-analysis and 4 observational studies showed that DAPT reduced the incidence of cardiac events following OPCAB. One randomized controlled trial and 4 observational studies showed that DAPT did not increase the incidence of major or minor bleeding complications following OPCAB. The results presented suggest that administration of DAPT in patients following OPCAB for at least 3 months improves saphenous vein graft patency and could be protective against recurrence of cardiac events, especially acute coronary syndrome, in comparison with aspirin monotherapy. The administration of DAPT following OPCAB is safe and is not associated with increased incidence of major or minor bleeding complications when compared with aspirin alone.

Comparison of Outcomes and Costs Associated With Aspirin ± Clopidogrel After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

Optimal antiplatelet therapy after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery remains controversial. This study evaluated the role of dual antiplatelet therapy using aspirin and clopidogrel (DAPT) versus antiplatelet therapy using aspirin only (ASA) on post-CABG clinical outcomes and costs. In the Department of Veterans Affairs Randomized On/Off Bypass (ROOBY) trial, clopidogrel use after CABG was prospectively collected beginning in year 2 of this study to include 1,525 of the 2,203 original ROOBY patients who received aspirin after CABG. Discretionarily, surgeons after CABG administered either DAPT or ASA treatments. The ROOBY trial's primary 30-day composite (mortality or perioperative morbidity), 1-year composite (all-cause death, repeat revascularization, or nonfatal myocardial infarction), and costs were compared for these 2 strategies. Of the 1,525 subjects, 511 received DAPT and 1,014 received ASA. DAPT subjects, compared with ASA subjects, had lower rates of preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction of ≥45% (78.8% vs 85.7%, p <0.001), on-pump CABG (36.6% vs 57.1%, p = 0.001), and endoscopic vein harvesting (30.0% vs 42.8%, p <0.001). ASA patients were more likely to have earlier aspirin administration and receive 325 versus 81 mg dosages. The 30-day composite outcome rate was significantly lower for DAPT patients compared with ASA patients (3.3% vs 7.1%, p = 0.003), but the 1-year composite outcome was equal between the 2 groups (12.0% vs12.0%, p = 1.0). At 1 year, there were no cost differences between the 2 groups. Propensity analyses did not significantly alter the results. In conclusion, DAPT appeared safe and was associated with fewer 30-day adverse outcomes than aspirin only and with no 1-year outcome or cost differences.

ISMICS Consensus Conference and Statements of Randomized Controlled Trials of Off-Pump versus Conventional Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

Objective

At this consensus conference, we developed evidence-informed consensus statements and recommendations on the practice of off-pump coronary artery bypass graft (OPCAB) by systematically reviewing and performing meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing OPCAB and conventional coronary artery bypass (CCAB).

Methods

All RCTs of OPCAB versus CCAB through April 2013 were screened, and 102 relevant RCTs (19,101 patients) were included in a systematic review and meta-analysis (15 RCTs of 9551 high-risk patients; and 87 RCTs of 9550 low-risk patients) in accordance with the Cochrane Collaboration and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology. Consensus statements for the risks and benefits of OPCAB surgery in mortality, morbidity, and resource use were developed based on best available evidence.

Results

Compared to CCAB, it is reasonable to perform OPCAB to reduce risks of stroke [class IIa, level of evidence (LOE) A], renal dysfunction/failure (class IIa, LOE A), blood transfusion (class I, LOE A), respiratory failure (class I, LOE A), atrial fibrillation (class I, LOE A), wound infection (class I, LOE A), ventilation time, and ICU and hospital length of stay (class I, LOE A). However, OPCAB may be associated with a reduced number of grafts performed (class I, LOE A) and with diminished graft patency (class IIa, LOE A, with increased coronary reintervention at 1 year and beyond (class IIa, LOE A), as well as increased mortality at a median follow-up of 5 years (class IIb, LOE A).

Conclusions

OPCAB compared with CCAB may improve outcomes in the short-term (stroke, renal dysfunction, blood transfusion, respiratory failure, atrial fibrillation, wound infection, ventilation time, and length of stay). However, over the longer-term, OPCAB may be associated with reduced graft patency, and increased risk of cardiac re-intervention and death.