Off pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) in critical left mainstem stenosis—Our experience

Background Beating heart surgery has now become the commonest technique of doing Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery (CABG) in our country. It is being used even in such high risk situations like diffuse coronary disease and Critical Left Main stem Stenosis (LMCS) with good results. The aim of this study is to retrospectively review our results in Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery (OPCAB) in patients with critical left main stem stenosis. Methods This study is a retrospective analysis of the data of patients who underwent primary coronary artery bypass surgery. During the period from April 2003 to September 2005 a total of 64 patients underwent OPCAB procedure for critical LMCS. During the same period 10 patients underwent CABG on Cardio Pulmonary Bypass (CPB). The age range was 36–77yrs. The sex distribution was M: F 53∶10. Ten patients were done as emergency. 2 of them were on Intra Aortic Balloon Pump (IABP) support preoperatively. 10 patients were high risk with a Euro score of ≥5. Results Left Internal Mammary Artery (LIMA) was used in 78% of cases. Average grafts per patient was 2.96. The median ventilation time was 5.91 hrs. New IABP insertion in postoperative period was required in 1 patient. One patient was reexplored for bleeding. There was one perioperative myocardial infarction. 57% of patients did not need any blood transfusion. There was no conversion to CPB. There was no operative mortality. Inotropes were used in ten cases. Conclusions OPCAB is a safe method of revascularization in patients with critical LMCS. Preoperative IABP is useful in patients with cardiogenic shock. However, there is a place for CPB in patients needing additional procedures like Mitral Valve repair (MV repair) or Dor's procedure or when the vessels are very diffusely diseased. Those patients who are unstable despite IABP support may be managed by Beating heart On Pump (BHOP) technique.     

The influence of different error estimates in the detection of post-operative cognitive dysfunction using reliable change indices with correction for practice effects.

The reliable change index (RCI) expresses change relative to its associated error, and is useful in the identification of post-operative cognitive dysfunction (POCD). This paper examines four common RCIs that each account for error in different ways. Three rules incorporate a constant correction for practice effects and are contrasted with the standard RCI that had no correction for practice. These rules are applied to 160 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery who completed neuropsychological assessments preoperatively and 1 week post-operatively using error and reliability data from a comparable healthy non-surgical control group. The rules all identify POCD in a similar proportion of patients, but the use of the within subject standard deviation, expressing the effects of random error, as an error estimate is a theoretically appropriate denominator when a constant error correction, removing the effects of systematic error, is deducted from the numerator in a RCI.     

Improved graft survival for flow cytometry and antihuman globulin crossmatch-negative retransplant recipients

We compared our standard NIH (extended incubation) crossmatch (XM) with antihuman globulin (AHG) and flow cytometry XMs and correlated the results with rejection episodes and graft survivals. For 89 CsA-Pred, primary renal allograft recipients, AHG and/or FCXM results did not improve on the NIH-XM-negative (NEG) graft survival results, whether testing pretransplant or historical (Hx) sera. Similarly, there was no association of a positive (POS) AHG or FCXM with increased rejection episodes in these primary recipients. However, for retransplant (Re-Tx) recipients a neg AHG or FCXM did discriminate fewer rejections and an improved graft survival compared with the NIH-XM-neg. results. The overall one-year graft survival for the 47 Re-Tx recipients studied herein was 66% (based on a neg pre-Tx NIH-XM). Pre-Tx AHG-NEG, Re-Tx recipients displayed an improved graft survival compared with NIH-XM NEG recipients (77% vs. 66%, P less than 0.05) and with AHG-POS recipients (77% vs. 47%, P less than 0.05). Similarly, pre-Tx, FCXM-NEG, Re-Tx recipients displayed improved graft survivals compared with NIH-XM-NEG recipients (83% vs. 66%, P less than 0.05) and FCXM-POS recipients (83% vs. 48%, P less than 0.05). Re-Tx recipients displaying a POS AHG and/or FCXM experienced a significantly greater number of rejections than NEG-XM recipients (P less than 0.05, respectively). The AHG and FCXM results correlated with rejections and graft survivals whether testing pre-Tx or Hx high-PRA sera. Re-Tx recipients who were AHG-XM-NEG but FCXM-POS, experienced more rejection episodes than recipients who displayed a negative XM reactivity for both AHG and FCXM (P less than 0.02), but with no resulting differences in graft survival. HLA matching, pre-Tx blood transfusions and PRA did not impact on these crossmatch and graft survival results. Use of AHG and/or FCXMs for Re-Tx, but not primary, recipients should help to improve graft survival for these high-risk recipients.