Evaluation of antiplatelet effects of a modified protocol by platelet aggregation in patients undergoing "one-stop" hybrid coronary revascularization

Evaluation of the effect of simultaneous hybrid coronary revascularization on postoperative bleeding and renal function: A comparison study with minimally invasive direct off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVES

The present study sought to compare postoperative bleeding and renal function in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing simultaneous hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) and minimally invasive direct off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCABG).

METHODS

The study retrospectively collected the data of 594 consecutive patients who underwent simultaneous HCR and 351 patients who underwent MIDCABG with planned staged HCR (MIDCABG first, then elective percutaneous coronary intervention) in Fuwai Hospital from June 2007 to December 2020. A total of 317 pairs of patients who were matched in a 1:1 ratio with propensity score matching were enrolled in this study. Bleeding and changes in renal function were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Compared with patients who underwent MIDCABG, patients who underwent simultaneous HCR had significantly greater chest tube drainage on the day of the operation (492.7 ± 282.4 mL vs 441.0 ± 261.9 mL; P = .023), but no significant difference was detected in the total amount during the postoperative period (788.8 ± 458.9 mL vs 753.3 ± 409.8 mL; P = .74). The differences in re-exploration for bleeding (0.3% vs 1.6%; P = .13), blood transfusion (18.9% vs 16.4%; P = .13), acute kidney injury (23.3% vs 18.6%; P = .53), and in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (including all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeated revascularization) (2.5% vs 1.9%; P = .67) between the 2 groups did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with MIDCABG, simultaneous HCR (MIDCABG first, instant percutaneous coronary intervention) did not increase postoperative bleeding or the incidence of acute kidney injury.

Heart team 2.0: A decision tree for minimally invasive and hybrid myocardial revascularization

Recent years have seen an important shift in the target population for myocardial revascularization. Patients are increasingly presenting with more complex coronary artery disease (CAD), but also with multiple comorbidities and frailty. At the same time, minimally invasive strategies such as Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (MIDCAB) and Percutaneous Coronary Interventions (PCI) have been developed, which might be more appealing for this group of patients. As a result, the landscape of options for myocardial revascularization is evolving while adequate use of all resources is required to ensure optimal patient care. Heart Teams are confronted with the challenge of incorporating the new minimally invasive strategies into the decision process, yet current guidelines do not fully address this challenge. In this review, the current evidence regarding outcomes, indications, benefits, and risks of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB), MIDCAB, PCI, and hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) are discussed. Based on this evidence and on experiences from Heart Team discussions, a new decision tree is proposed that incorporates recent advances in minimally invasive revascularization strategies, thereby optimizing adequate delivery of care for each individual patient's needs. Introducing all important considerations in a logical way, this tool facilitates the decision-making process and might ensure appropriate use of resources and optimal care for individual patients.

One-year cost-effectiveness and safety of simultaneous hybrid coronary revascularization versus conventional coronary artery bypass grafting

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and safety of simultaneous hybrid coronary revascularization (sHCR) compared to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in elective patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

METHODS

Cost-utility analysis of a prospective cohort follow-up study comparing per protocol 50 sHCR patients to 50 contemporaneous matched patients undergoing CABG. Resource utilization data and health-related quality of life were collected prospectively, and the cumulative 1-year costs were assessed from the Danish health sector perspective. Effectiveness was measured by quality-adjusted life years using EuroQol-5D. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses using bootstrapping were conducted. Secondary safety measures including early clinical outcomes and freedom from major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events at 1 year were assessed.

RESULTS

The clinical trial was discontinued prematurely due to safety reasons after inclusion of 50 patients (24 sHCR; 26 CABG), as the chest tube output and the risk of postoperative pleural effusions requiring thoracocentesis were significantly increased following sHCR compared with CABG. Based on 48 patients available for 1-year follow-up, both treatment strategies were similarly effective (quality-adjusted life year difference between the groups -0.019), with a net cost difference in favour of conventional CABG estimated to be €2173 per patient. Exclusion of 1 outlier patient with chronic renal failure and deep sternal wound infection in the sHCR group resulted in an equalization of the total 1-year costs.

CONCLUSIONS

At 1 year, sHCR was less cost-effective than conventional CABG and associated with higher chest tube output and a higher risk of postoperative pleural effusions requiring thoracocentesis.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01496664.

Hybrid Revascularization: A Review

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines surgical bypass with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) performed either during the same procedure or in a staged approach within 60 days. Coronary artery bypass grafting using the left internal mammary artery (LIMA) has shown excellent long-term patency with improved patient survival. It remains the gold standard treatment for the majority of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. However, saphenous vein grafts have poor long-term patency. Advances in stent technology have resulted in reduced rates of thrombosis and restenosis, making PCI a viable alternative to coronary surgery in selected patients. HCR is attractive as a less invasive method of coronary revascularization which preserves the benefits of the LIMA performed with less invasive surgical techniques with the efficacy of newer generation stents.

The impact of clopidogrel therapy on postoperative bleeding after robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass surgery

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to determine whether patients undergoing robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) on clopidogrel had an increased risk of bleeding complications compared with those not on clopidogrel.

METHODS

From 2008 to 2011, 322 patients underwent robotic-assisted CABG either as an isolated procedure or as part of a hybrid coronary revascularization procedure (HCR). Patients were classified according to whether they received clopidogrel within 5 days of surgery or intraoperatively (n = 64) compared with those who never received or who had discontinued clopidogrel therapy >5 days before surgery (n = 258). A propensity analysis using 31 preoperative variables was used to control for confounding variables. In a subgroup analysis, patients undergoing one-stage HCR (clopidogrel load 600 mg in odds ratio (OR) prior to stenting) were compared with patients in the clopidogrel group who underwent two-stage HCR.

RESULTS

In the Clopidogrel group, the mean interval between surgery and last dose of clopidogrel was 2.1 ± 1.5 days. Compared with the No Clopidogrel group, the Clopidogrel group had greater 24-h chest tube drainage (1003 ± 572 vs 782 ± 530 ml, P = 0.004) and more blood transfusions (35.9%, 23 of 64 patients vs 20.9%, 54 of 258 patients, P = 0.01). On logistic regression analysis, there was greater 24-h chest tube drainage in the Clopidogrel group (+198 ml, P = 0.02) and a significantly higher incidence of blood transfusion (OR = 2.30, P = 0.01). In the subgroup analysis, patients undergoing one-stage HCR (n = 17) had greater 24-h chest tube drainage compared with patients undergoing two-stage HCR (1262 vs 909 ml, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing robotic-assisted CABG on clopidogrel had more postoperative bleeding and a higher incidence of blood transfusion. Therefore, despite a less invasive approach, surgery should be delayed in these patients when possible.

Status quo of hybrid coronary revascularization for multi-vessel coronary artery disease

Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines bypass grafting of the left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of non-LAD vessels. HCR has been performed as an alternative to CABG or multi-vessel PCI in thousands of patients since the late 1990s. In this review article, we provide an overview on patient selection, procedural sequence and timing, use of surgical techniques and anti-platelet agents. Additionally, patient recovery, satisfaction, costs and clinical outcomes of individual studies after HCR are evaluated. Future directions are also discussed, including the need for adequately powered randomized trials.

Effect of one-stop hybrid coronary revascularization on postoperative renal function and bleeding: a comparison study with off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting surgery

OBJECTIVES

Although 1-stop hybrid coronary revascularization offers potential benefits for selected patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, the exposure to contrast dye and potent antiplatelet drugs could increase the risk of postoperative acute kidney injury and coagulopathy. The goal of the present study was to compare the measures of renal function, postoperative bleeding, and transfusion requirements in patients undergoing hybrid revascularization compared with off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data from 141 consecutive patients who had undergone 1-stop hybrid coronary revascularization from June 2007 to January 2011. Propensity score matching with 141 off-pump CABG patients from our surgical database was performed for comparison. The change in renal function, cumulative chest tube drainage, and clinical outcome parameters were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Compared with off-pump CABG, patients undergoing hybrid revascularization had significantly less chest tube drainage at 12 hours after surgery (P = .04) and for the total amount during the postoperative period (P < .001) and required fewer blood transfusions (P = .001). The hybrid group had a higher incidence of acute kidney injury, but this did not reach statistical significance (25.2% vs 17.6%, P = .13). The hybrid group required less inotropic and vasoactive support, had fewer respiratory complications, required a shorter time of mechanical support, and had a decreased length of intensive care unit stay.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with off-pump CABG, 1-stop hybrid coronary revascularization was associated with benefits such as less postoperative bleeding and blood transfusion requirements without significantly increasing the additional risk of acute kidney injury.

Hybrid coronary revascularization as a safe, feasible, and viable alternative to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting: what is the current evidence?

The “hybrid” approach to multivessel coronary artery disease combines surgical left internal thoracic artery (LITA) to left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) bypass grafting and percutaneous coronary intervention of the remaining lesions. Ideally, the LITA to LAD bypass graft is performed in a minimally invasive fashion. This review aims to clarify the place of hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) in the current therapeutic armamentarium against multivessel coronary artery disease. Eighteen studies including 970 patients were included for analysis. The postoperative LITA patency varied between 93.0% and 100.0%. The mean overall survival rate in hybrid treated patients was 98.1%. Hybrid treated patients showed statistically significant shorter hospital length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, and intubation time, less packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusion requirements, and lower in-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rates compared with patients treated by on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This resulted in a significant reduction in costs for hybrid treated patients in the postoperative period. In studies completed to date, HCR appears to be a promising and cost-effective alternative for CABG in the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease in a selected patient population.

Midterm Outcomes of Simultaneous Hybrid Coronary Artery Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

<p><b>Background:</b> The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and midterm outcomes of a simultaneous hybrid revascularization strategy for left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD), compared with conventional off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB).</p><p><b>Methods:</b> We compared the in-hospital and midterm outcomes of a simultaneous hybrid revascularization strategy (minimally invasive direct coronary bypass grafting of the left anterior descending coronary artery [LAD] and percutaneous intervention to non-LAD lesions) in 20 patients with LMCAD in an enhanced operating room. These patients were matched by propensity score to a group of 20 control patients who underwent standard OPCAB between September 2007 and December 2009.</p><p><b>Results:</b> All baseline clinical characteristics of the 2 groups were similar. All of the patients in the 2 groups underwent surgery uneventfully without conversion to on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Compared with OPCAB, the patients in the hybrid group had shorter lengths of stay in the intensive care unit (34.8 � 37.6 hours versus 50.7 � 34.5 hours, <i>P</i> = .01). Transfusion requirements were reduced in the hybrid patients compared with the OPCAB patients (5% versus 40%, <i>P</i> = .01). The 2 groups did not differ with respect to the occurrence of other important morbidities. During the mean (�SD) follow-up of 18.5 � 9.8 months, the group of patients who underwent the simultaneous hybrid procedure experienced an incidence of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events that was similar to that of the OPCAB control group (100% versus 90%, respectively; <i>P</i> = .31).</p><p><b>Conclusions:</b> The midterm follow-up indicated that the simultaneous hybrid revascularization procedure for LMCAD is feasible, safe, and effective. These promising early findings warrant further prospective investigations.</p>