Early clinical outcomes of on-pump beating-heart versus off-pump technique for surgical revascularization in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction: the experience of a single center
Authors:
Open Access
- 23 February 2017
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery
- Vol. 12 (1) , 11
Abstract
Limited experiences of applying an on-pump beating-heart technique for surgical revascularization in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction have been reported. Which strategy, either off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or on-pump beating-heart CABG surgery, is the best strategy for surgical revascularization in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction is still controversial. This single-center study aimed to evaluate the impacts of an on-pump beating-heart versus an off-pump technique for surgical revascularization on the early clinical outcomes in patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 35% or less to explore which technique would be more suitable for surgical revascularization in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction. A total of 216 consecutive patients with an echocardiographic estimated LVEF of 35% or less who underwent non-emergency, primary, isolated CABG from January 2010 to December 2014 were included in this study and were divided into either an ONBEAT group (patients who received on-pump beating-heart CABG surgery, n = 88) or an OFF group (patients who received off-pump CABG surgery, n = 128). The early clinical outcomes were investigated and compared. Patients in the ONBEAT group compared to the OFF group had a significant higher early postoperative LVEF (35.6 ± 2.9 vs. 34.8 ± 3.3%, p = 0.034) but shared a similar baseline LVEF (31.0 ± 2.8 vs. 31.0 ± 2.9%, p = 0.930). Patients in the ONBEAT group compared to the OFF group received a greater number of grafts and an increased amount of drainage during the first 24 h (3.7 ± 0.8 vs. 2.8 ± 0.6, p <0.001; 715 ± 187 ml vs. 520 ± 148 ml, p <0.001, respectively), without evidence of worse in-hospital mortality or major postoperative morbidity. Additionally, logistic regression analysis showed that surgical technique (on-pump beating-heart CABG vs. off-pump CABG) had no independent influence on in-hospital mortality or major postoperative morbidity in patients with preoperative LVEF of 35% or less. The on-pump beating-heart technique may be an acceptable alternative to the off-pump technique for surgical revascularization in patients with an estimated LVEF of 35% or less.Keywords
This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit:
- Intra‐Aortic Balloon Pump Support in the Isolated Beating Porcine Heart in Nonischemic and Ischemic Pump FailureArtificial Organs, 2015
- On-Pump Versus Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery in High-Risk PatientsInternational Heart Journal, 2014
- Do octogenarians benefit from coronary artery bypass surgeryCurrent Opinion in Cardiology, 2012
- Validation of EuroSCORE II in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass SurgeryThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 2012
- Predicting Mortality in High-Risk Coronary Artery Bypass: Surgeon Versus Risk Model1Journal of Surgical Research, 2012
- On-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery in high-risk patients: Operative results of a prospective randomized trial (on-off study)The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2012
- Cirurgia de revascularização miocárdica com circulação extracorpórea versus sem circulação extracorpórea: uma metanáliseArquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, 2012
- Coronary artery surgery in octogenarians: evolving strategies for the improvement in early and late resultsHeart and Vessels, 2011
- Conversion in Off-Pump coronary artery bypass grafting: an analysis of predictors and outcomesThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 2003
- The intraaortic balloon pump in cardiac surgeryThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 2002