非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术的血流动力学研究

目的：分析非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术中血流动力学的变化。方法：2000年6月至2001年1月，连续32例病人接受非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术，术中、术后对各吻合血管的血流动力学指标进行持续监测。全组完成前降支吻合32例、右冠状动脉26例、回旋支28例、对角支8例。结果：本组死亡例。行前降支冠状动脉吻合时血流动力学指标无明显变化。右冠状动脉吻合时影响右心功能。回旋支及对角支冠状动脉吻合时对血流动力学有明显的影响，导致平均肺动脉压（MPAP）、肺毛细血管楔压（PAWP）、中心静脉压（CVP）明显升高，每搏指数（SVI）及左室每搏功指数（LVSWI）有明显下降；心排指数（CI）有一定的下降趋势。行主动脉近心端吻合时尽管已无心脏搬动，但MPAP、SVRI及肺循环阻力指数（PVRI）仍较诱导后有明显升高，CI有明显下降。术毕及术的2、6、16h各血流动力学指标趋于正常，CI有明显改善。结论：非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植行前降支及右冠状动脉吻合时对血流动力学影响较小，回旋支及对角支冠状动脉吻合时对血流动力学有明显的影响，术毕及术后2、6、16h各血流动力学指标趋于正常，心脏功能有明显改善。     

非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术

目的:总结非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术(OPCAB)的临床经验。方法:自2001年3月～2002年10月我院共完成OPCAB9例,在进行旁路移植吻合时,冠状动脉的暴露和制动借助于特制胸骨牵开器和配套的冠状动脉固定器。结果:无手术死亡,无围手术期心肌梗死等严重并发症发生,短期随访临床效果满意。结果:OPCAB安全可行,可减少输血,减轻手术创伤与并发症,近期疗效满意。     

非体外循环下冠状动脉旁路移植术

目的 总结110例非体外循环心脏跳动下冠状动脉旁路移植术经验，探讨其手术适应证、优缺点及手术方法。方法 常温、全身麻醉，胸正中切口，非体外循环心脏跳动下，应用特殊心表固定器行冠状动脉旁路移植术，平均搭桥3．9支，血管桥为乳内动脉、大隐静脉及桡动脉。结果 全组无手术死亡，术后心绞痛症状消失。手术时间平均为210min，术后气管插管时间平均为4．8h。术后住院时间平均为10d，住院费用平均为4．4万元。其中3例术中出现不可逆血压过低、室颤而转为体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术。结论 非体外循环心脏跳动下冠状动脉旁路移植术是一种安全、有效的治疗方法。特别适合于老年及心功能差的患者，可减少体外循环并发症，缩短术后住院时间，降低住院费用，但不能完全替代体外循环旁路移植术。     

153例非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术

目的总结153例非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术患者无手术死亡的治疗经验. 方法回顾性分析近4年来153例非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术的临床资料、手术方法、手术结果. 结果全组无手术死亡.每例平均移植旁路血管3.1支,全组无围手术期心肌梗死、呼吸衰竭、肝肾功能衰竭等并发症,141例患者术后4～6小时拔除气管内插管,86例患者未输库血,术后心绞痛均消失.所有患者均获随访,随访时间2～42个月,无晚期死亡.1例患者于术后1年6个月出现活动后胸闷、心绞痛,其余患者症状均消失,活动量明显增加,心功能改善. 结论非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术安全、有效,术后并发症少,正确掌握其手术适应证、手术技巧和围术期处理,是确保手术疗效的关键.     

非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术40例

目的探讨报告非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术(OPCAB)的临床应用价值。方法40例患者均在全麻、常温下经胸骨正中切口行OPCAB术,其中单支病变1例,2支病变5例,3支病变16例,4支病变18例。结果全组无手术死亡,平均搭桥3.1支,术后平均呼吸机辅助时间为(8.0±2.5)h。结论对冠状动脉疾病,OPCAB是一种安全,有效的治疗方法。     

70岁以上病人非体外循环与常规冠状动脉旁路移植术比较

目的　探讨 70岁以上老年病人非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术 (OPCAB)的疗效。方法　比较 78例 70岁以上OPCAB和 32例 70岁以上常规体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术 (CCABG)的临床资料。结果　两组术后桥通畅率均为 10 0 % ,OPCAB和CCABG两组平均住院时间 (9 2 5± 4 0 3)d对(13 18± 7 5 4)d ,平均ICU时间 (2 4 0± 8 5 )h对 (38 5± 2 5 5 )h ,房颤发生率为 8%对 15 %。结论　老年病人有选择的施行OPCAB是一种合理和安全的术式 ,如果可能的话应尽量考虑采用此术式。     

非体外循环紧急转为体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术的分析

目的了解导致非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术(off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting,off-pumpCABG)紧急转为体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术(on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting,on-pump CABG)的临床的原因,为手术方法的选择提供借鉴。方法回顾分析2002年1月～2006年5月期间546例冠心病患者行off-pumpCABG的临床资料,对术中需紧急转为体外循环下完成手术的患者(off-pump转on-pump组,24例)与同期顺利完成off-pump CABG患者(off-pump组,522例)进行对比分析,并行logistic多因素分析。结果在行off-pump CABG中,24例患者因心室颤动或血流动力学不稳定需紧急改变术式。Off-pump转on-pump组患者中死亡4例,死亡率为16.7%(4/24),明显高于off-pump组[16.7%vs.2.7%(14/522),P<0.001]。多因素logistic回归分析结果提示急性心肌梗死(OR=3.142,P=0.004)、急诊CABG(OR=1.571,P=0.011)和右冠状动脉狭窄≤90%(OR=1.922,P=0.024)为off-pump转为on-pump的危险因素。结论Off-pump紧急转为on-pump时死亡率明显增高,对同时合并有右冠状动脉狭窄≤90%、急性心肌梗死和急诊CABG等高危因素行off-pump CABG时,要做好体外循环的准备。     

体外循环和非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术的早期疗效比较

目的比较非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术(OPCAB)与体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的早期疗效,探讨OPCAB的安全性和有效性。方法对2007年1月至2008年8月我院收治的41例不合并有心脏瓣膜病、室壁瘤等其它心脏病的冠心病患者按照随机抽签的方法分成两组,OPCAB组:21例,年龄65.30±3.10岁;CABG组:20例,年龄61.80±3.20岁;比较两组患者术后并发症发生率及左心室射血分数(LVEF)等临床指标。结果两组患者旁路移植血管支数、手术时间、二次开胸止血、肾功能不全及早期心功能改善(术后2周EF)等指标比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05),但CABG组呼吸机辅助时间(14.52±4.34hvs.6.32±1.38h,t=8.237,P=0.001),24h胸腔引流量(526.56±90.21mlvs.321.45±102.31ml,t=6.796,P=0.001),24h输血量(679.50±182.60mlvs.310.30±168.30ml,t=6.736,P=0.001),心房颤动发生率(15%vs.5%,χ2=5.334,P=0.025),使用正性肌力药(40%vs.14%,χ2=0.222,P=0.586)及脑部并发症发生率(10%vs.0%,χ2=7.221,P=0.008)等均高于OPCAB组。结论两种手术方式均安全、有效;但对合并有慢性肺部疾病和颈动脉有斑块或曾经有脑血管意外的患者,OPCAB可做为首选手术方法 。     

非体外循环下冠状动脉旁路移植术

目的　探讨和评价微创非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术 (OPCAB)的临床效果。　方法　 38例 OPCAB患者中左冠状动脉主干病变 4例 ,1支血管病变 10例 ,2支 14例 ,3支 10例 ,均经胸骨正中切口行 OPCAB,每例移植血管 1～ 5支 ,平均移植血管 2 .42支。应用左乳内动脉 38支 ,大隐静脉 5 4支。　结果　全组无手术死亡 ,36例顺利完成手术 ,2例转为心肺转流术下冠状动脉旁路移植术。38例均在手术后 2～ 12小时 ,平均 4.9± 2 .6小时顺利拔除气管内插管。全组均顺利康复 ,15例手术后 1个月内恢复了原工作。　结论　对有适应证的患者 ,OPCAB是一项安全有效的术式     

Risk-adjusted analysis of long-term outcomes after on- versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting

 Open in a separate windowOBJECTIVESRecent data suggested that off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) may carry a higher risk for mortality in the long term when compared to on-pump coronary artery bypass (ONCAB). We, therefore, compared long-term survival and morbidity in patients undergoing ONCAB versus OPCAB in a large single-centre cohort.METHODSA total of 8981 patients undergoing isolated elective/urgent coronary artery bypass grafting between January 2009 and December 2019 were analysed. Patients were stratified into 2 groups (OPCAB n = 6649/ONCAB n = 2332). The primary end point was all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints included repeat revascularization, stroke and myocardial infarction. To adjust for potential selection bias, 1:1 nearest neighbour propensity score (PS) matching was performed resulting in 1857 matched pairs. Moreover, sensitivity analysis was applied in the entire study cohort using multivariable- and PS-adjusted Cox regression analysis.RESULTSIn the PS-matched cohort, 10-year mortality was similar between study groups [OPCAB 36.4% vs ONCAB 35.8%: hazard ratio (HR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.87–1.12; P = 0.84]. While 10-year outcomes of secondary endpoints did not differ significantly, risk of stroke (OPCAB 1.50% vs ONCAB 2.8%: HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.32–0.83; P = 0.006) and mortality (OPCAB 3.1% vs ONCAB 4.8%: HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.47–0.91; P = 0.011) at 1 year was lower in the OPCAB group. In the multivariable- and the PS-adjusted model, mortality at 10 years was not significantly different (OPCAB 34.1% vs ONCAB 35.7%: HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.87–1.08; P = 0.59 and HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.90–1.13; P = 0.91, respectively).CONCLUSIONSData do not provide evidence that elective/urgent OPCAB is associated with significantly higher risks of mortality, repeat revascularization, or myocardial infarction during late follow-up when compared to ONCAB. Patients undergoing OPCAB may benefit from reduced risks of stroke and mortality within the first year postoperatively.     

Safe evolution towards routine off-pump coronary artery bypass: negotiating the learning curve

Objective: Off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) hopes to avoid morbidity associated with cardiopulmonary bypass, improving clinical outcomes. Yet its technical difficulty and unfamiliarity raise concern that adoption of OPCAB might be associated with poorer outcomes during each surgeon's ‘learning curve’. We examined trends in patient selection over time as a single surgeon's practice evolved to routine OPCAB. Methods: Between 10-1-96 and 12-31-01, 1479 consecutive patients had isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Clinical data were gathered prospectively and reviewed retrospectively. Trends in adoption of OPCAB and clinical outcomes were examined. Results: There were 756 OPCAB and 723 CABG/cardiopulmonary bypass patients. The practice evolved from 90% conventional CABG to 93% OPCAB. An abrupt transition coincided with evolution of techniques to expose the obtuse marginal arteries, and improvements in suction-based coronary stabilizers. Mortality was 1.0% for the off-pump group and 2.1% for the on-pump group. Careful patient selection helped maintain acceptable outcomes during the ‘learning curve’. Patients with depressed left ventricular ejection fraction, left main disease, and complex three vessel disease were excluded from OPCAB until significant experience (>200 cases) was attained. Presently, all isolated coronary bypass cases are candidates for OPCAB except patients with ischemic ventricular arrhythmias, those in cardiac arrest, and those for whom previous left pneumonectomy or deep pectus excavatum prevent rightward mobilization of heart. Conclusions: Despite a significant learning curve, evolution to routine OPCAB can be achieved while maintaining good patient outcomes. The development of specialized techniques, coronary stabilizers, and apical suction devices allows the application of OPCAB to virtually all coronary bypass patients, as surgeon experience matures.     

心脏不停跳非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术的进展

近年来，随着手术器械的发展，心脏不停跳非体外循环下冠状动脉旁路移植术(OPCAB)逐渐被广泛接受和应用。与常规冠状动脉旁路移植术(CCABG)比较，OPCAB的主要优势为血液中多种炎性介质浓度明显降低，避免了体外循环(CPB)带来的全身系统性炎性损害，减少了并发症，降低了手术死亡率。特别对那些不能采用CPB或采用CPB有风险的高危患者优势更明显。CCABG的手术适应证同样适用于OPCAB，但OPCAB具有相对的禁忌证。OPCAB多采用胸骨正中切口，左前外侧切口适用于左前降支单支病变。OPCAB术后早期结果类似CCABG，但中远期结果有待进一步观察。OPCAB大多数旁路移植血管数低于CCABG，有不能完全再血管化的可能，对OPCAB是否会影响吻合的精确性和旁路血管的长期通畅率有不同意见。OPCAB的优势明确，但仍不能完全替代CCABG，手术的同时应作好CPB准备，必要时改行CCABG。     

不停跳冠状动脉旁路移植术联合同期肺切除术

目的总结不停跳冠状动脉旁路移植术联合同期肺切除术的经验。方法7例不稳定性心绞痛或心肌梗死合并可切除肺部病变患者,实施不停跳冠状动脉旁路移植术联合同期肺切除术。所有患者术前行冠状动脉造影证实不宜行冠状动脉成形术或支架植入术。采用胸骨正中切口,不停跳冠状动脉旁路移植术后行肺切除术。左上肺叶切除2例,右上肺叶切除1例,右上、中叶切除1例,右下肺叶切除1例,左侧肺减容术1例,双侧肺减容术1例。结果本组无住院死亡,但有1例后期死亡。术后并发症包括1例胸骨哆开再次开胸固定、1例房颤。病理检查结果5例肺部恶性肿瘤、2例慢性阻塞性肺气肿。患者随访2～31个月,所有患者术后没有再次出现心肌缺血症状,1例行右肺上、中叶切除患者术后19个月出现局部复发。结论胸骨正中切口不停跳冠状动脉旁路移植术联合同期肺切除术是安全有效的并能降低术后并发症。     

非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术在高危冠心病中的应用

目的 探讨用非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术(OPCAB)的方法，以避免体外循环对冠心病高危因素患者产生的不良影响。方法 对100例冠心病患者行OPCAB，其中69例伴有冠心外科手术的高危因素。血管病变主要涉及左、右冠状动脉各分支。结果 手术死亡1例(1.4％)，手术转换2例(2．9％)，移植血管失功1例(1.4％)，术后非致命性心肌梗死4例(5．8％)，肾功能衰竭1例(1．4％)，胸骨感染1例(1．4％)，24小时内拔除气管内插管68例(98.6％)，接受输血17例(25．O％)。术后随访56例，随访时间1—13个月，死亡2例，心绞痛复发4例，充血性心力衰竭2例。术后无脑血管意外、再次手术止血、室性心律失常、下胶切口感染和呼吸衰竭等并发症发生。随访病例中14例做冠状动脉血管造影术，仅1例移植血管狭窄大于50％。所有乳内动脉血管桥均通畅。结论 对某些具有冠心外科手术高危因素的患者，采用OPCAB可降低并发症发生率和手术死亡率。然而，这种技术较适用于冠状动脉解剖条件较好的病例。远期结果需要长期随访进一步加以证实。     

非体外循环冠状动脉搭桥术的近期疗效评价

目的　分析非体外循环 (OPCAB)与常规体外循环下冠状动脉搭桥术 (cCABG)后监护特点和近期疗效。　方法　比较OPCAB组 (6 0例 )和cCABG组 (6 2例 )术后引流量和输血量、血管活性药物的使用、一般监护治疗和恢复情况及近期临床疗效。　结果　OPCAB组术后引流量小于 4 0 0ml的例数明显多于cCABG组 (χ2 =7.316 ,P <0 .0 1) ,而大于 80 0ml的例数明显少于cCABG组 (χ2 =13.2 16 ,P <0 0 0 1)。OPCAB组术后未输血例数明显多于cCABG组 (χ2 =37.793,P <0 0 0 1)。OPCAB组使用硝普钠的例数较cCABG组多 (χ2 =12 .0 0 6 ,P <0 .0 0 1) ,而使用多巴胺的例数明显少于cCABG组 (χ2 =32 .198,P<0 .0 0 1) ,且未使用多巴酚丁胺。OPCAB组术后辅助通气 (5 .9± 3.3)h ,心电监测 (4.8± 1.7)d ,术后(18 1± 4 .1)h坐起 ,(15 .2± 5 .0 )h开始进食 ,平均 (2 .3± 0 .9)d拔除引流管 ,均明显短于cCABG组 (t =14 .0 2 5 ,5 .4 71,5 .791,8.95 3,5 .80 0 ,P <0 .0 1)。OPCAB组死亡 1例 ,围术期心肌梗死 1例 ,心律失常 4例 ,使用IABP 1例 ,较cCABG组少 ,但差别均无显著性 (χ2 =1.776 ,1.776 ,1.937,1.77,P >0 .0 5 )。　结论　OPCAB术后循环稳定 ,创伤小 ,恢复快 ,体现出微创手术的优越性     

雷米芬太尼在非体外循环冠状动脉搭桥术"快通道"麻醉中的应用

目的 研究雷米芬太尼用于非体外循环下冠状动脉搭桥术"快通道"麻醉的临床效果.方法 48例行非体外循环下冠状动脉搭桥术患者随机均分为雷米芬太尼组(R组)和芬太尼组(F组).记录两组诱导前(T0)、插管后2 min(T1)、切皮后2 min(T2)、锯胸骨后2 min(T3)、关胸时(T4)、手术结束后30min(T5)的HR,MAP、CVP,肺小动脉楔压(PAWP)、肺毛细血管楔压(PCWP)、术后拔管时间、ICU停留时间和住院时间.结果 R组与F组比较血流动力学和住院时间差异无统计学意义.R组在拔管时间和ICU停留时间上显著短于F组(P<0.01).结论 雷米芬太尼用于非体外循环下冠状动脉搭桥术"快通道"麻醉安全性高、效果明显.     

The clinical outcome of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery in the elderly patients

Objective: There has been a body of evidence showing that off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) may reduce morbidity and mortality in the elderly patients. We reviewed our experience, retrospectively, on elderly patients aged 75 years and older who were operated on using the OPCAB technique. We compared their outcome to a similar group of elderly patients who were operated on using conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) during the same period of time. Methods: Registry data and patients' notes and charts were reviewed for 56 consecutive elderly OPCAB patients (age 78.5±3.5 years) and 87 consecutive CPB patients (age 77.2±2.4 years, P=0.01). Both groups had similar risk factor profiles: Parsonnet score 17.4±4.4 (OPCAB) versus 16.6±5.2 (CPB), P=0.19. We studied in detail their preoperative and postoperative data in order to compare the outcomes of both techniques. Results: The length of stay in the intensive therapy unit (ITU) was 35.4±52.9 h for OPCAB patients and 77.6±144.9 h for CPB patients (P=0.0008). No patient died within 30 days in the OPCAB group, whilst ten (11%) CPB patients (P=0.0066) died within 30 days. The incidence of serious complications (including pulmonary oedema, septicaemia, permanent stroke and renal dysfunction requiring haemofiltration or haemodialysis) was one (2%) in the OPCAB group and 11 (13%) in the CPB group (P=0.028). CPB patients required a significantly higher number ten (12%) of intra-aortic balloon pumps (IABP) inserted compared to only one patient (2%) in the OPCAB group who required IABP insertion (P=0.05). Nine (11%) CPB patients were re-operated on for bleeding compared to no OPCAB patient (0%) needing re-operation, P=0.011. Conclusions: Although the mean age of the OPCAB group was significantly higher than the CPB group, the OPCAB group showed a significant reduction in postoperative serious morbidity, ITU stay and mortality. We believe that such a conclusion may have some effect on the decision-making and cost-effectiveness when performing coronary bypass surgery on the elderly population.     

Safety and efficacy of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in chronic dialysis patients

Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) has been recently revived, because cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) appears to worsen the multiple organ dysfunction after conventional CABG. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the off-pump CABG in chronic dialysis patients, we compared the perioperative morbidity and mortality between 15 dialysis patients who underwent off-pump CABG at our center over the past 8 years with that of a concurrent group of 19 patients who underwent conventional CABG. Patients were selected for off-pump CABG only when complete revascularization was technically feasible. We found that off-pump CABG is as safe and effective as conventional CABG in selected dialysis patients. It might even be beneficial, because it is associated with less hematocrit drop and blood product use, a lower catabolic rate, and fewer dialysis requirements after surgery. However, the impact of off-pump technique on the long-term clinical outcome and resource utilization in renal patients requires further investigation.