首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
检索        


Off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: Insights from the Arterial Revascularization Trial
Authors:Umberto Benedetto  Douglas G Altman  Stephen Gerry  Alastair Gray  Belinda Lees  Marcus Flather  David P Taggart
Institution:1. Bristol Heart Institute, University of Bristol, School of Clinical Sciences, Bristol, United Kingdom;2. Centre for Statistics in Medicine, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology, and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom;3. Department of Public Health, Health Economics Research Centre, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom;4. Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, United Kingdom;5. Research and Development Unit, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, United Kingdom
Abstract:

Background

The long-term effects of off-pump coronary artery bypass continue to be controversial because some studies have reported increased adverse event rates with off-pump coronary artery bypass when compared with on-pump coronary artery bypass. The Arterial Revascularization Trial compared survival after bilateral versus single internal thoracic artery grafting. The choice of off-pump coronary artery bypass versus on-pump coronary artery bypass was based on the surgeon's discretion. We performed a post hoc analysis of the Arterial Revascularization Trial to compare 5-year outcomes with 2 strategies.

Methods

Among 3102 patients enrolled in the Arterial Revascularization Trial, we selected 1260 patients who underwent off-pump coronary artery bypass versus 1700 patients who underwent on-pump coronary artery bypass with cardioplegic arrest for the present comparison. Primary outcomes were 5-year mortality and incidence of major cardiac and cerebrovascular events, including cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, and revascularization after index procedure. Propensity score matching selected 1260 pairs for final comparison. Stratified Cox models were used for treatment effect estimate.

Results

Hospital mortality was comparable between off-pump coronary artery bypass and on-pump coronary artery bypass groups (12 1.0%] vs 15 1.2%]; P = .7). Conversion rate to on-pump during off-pump coronary artery bypass was 29 of 1260 (2.3%). When compared with off-pump coronary artery bypass not converted, off-pump coronary artery bypass converted to on-pump presented a remarkably higher hospital mortality (10.3% vs 0.7%; P < .001). At 5 years, the mortality rate was 110 (8.9%) versus 102 (8.3%) in the off-pump coronary artery bypass and on-pump coronary artery bypass groups, respectively, with no significant difference (hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-1.52; P = .35). Incidence of major cardiac and cerebrovascular events was 175 (14.3) versus 169 (13.8) in the off-pump coronary artery bypass and on-pump coronary artery bypass groups, respectively, with no significant difference (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-1.31; P = .65).

Conclusions

The present post hoc Arterial Revascularization Trial analysis supports the hypothesis that both off-pump coronary artery bypass and on-pump coronary artery bypass are equally effective and safe.
Keywords:off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting  survival  propensity score matching  ART  Arterial Revascularization Trial  CI  confidence interval  CORONARY  CABG Off or On Pump Revascularization Study  CVA  cerebrovascular accident  MACCE  major cardiac and cerebrovascular events  MI  myocardial infarction  ONCAB  on-pump coronary artery bypass  OPCAB  off-pump coronary artery bypass  ROOBY  Randomized On/Off Bypass
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号