| Abstract: | 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. |
