Background It is not known which patient subgroups may benefit most from off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) rather than coronary artery bypass grafting on cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). ...Methods The Society of Thoracic Surgeons database was queried for all isolated, primary coronary artery bypass graft cases between January 1, 1997, and December 31, 2007, at a US academic center. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (PROM) was calculated by a formula based on 30 preoperative risk factors. It was used in three ways to compare 30-day operative mortality between patients treated with OPCAB versus CPB. First, patients were divided into quartiles based on their PROM, and mortality rates were compared between OPCAB and CPB patients within each PROM quartile. Second, a logistic regression model tested for an interaction between surgery type and PROM; a significant interaction would indicate that the relative mortality risk of OPCAB versus CPB varied with different PROM levels. Finally, locally smoothed kernel regression curves were used to visually estimate a threshold PROM point at which mortality rates diverge for the surgery types. Results There were 14,766 consecutive patients, 7,083 OPCAB (48.0%) and 7,683 CPB (52.0%). There was no difference in operative mortality between OPCAB and CPB for patients in the lower two risk quartiles. In the higher risk quartiles there was a mortality benefit for OPCAB (odds ratio, 0.62 and 0.45 for OPCAB in the third and fourth risk quartiles). Logistic regression analysis confirmed a significant interaction between surgery type and PROM ( p = 0.005) meaning that OPCAB is especially beneficial to patients with higher PROM. This benefit is most significant for patients with PROM values above 2.5% to 3%, where mortality curves sharply diverge. Conclusions Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting is associated with lower operative mortality than coronary artery bypass grafting on CPB for higher risk patients. This mortality benefit increases with increasing PROM.
Background It is not clear whether radial artery (RA), right internal thoracic artery (RITA), or saphenous vein (SV) is the preferred second bypass graft during coronary artery bypass graft surgery ...using the left internal thoracic artery (LITA) in patients aged less or greater than 70 years. Methods Late survival data were collected for 13,324 consecutive, isolated, primary coronary artery bypass graft surgery patients from three hospitals. Cox regression analysis was performed on all patients grouped by age. Results Adjusted Cox regression showed overall better RA versus SV survival (hazard ratio HR 0.82, p < 0.001) and no difference in RITA versus SV survival (HR 0.95, p = 0.35). However, the survival benefit of RA versus SV was seen only in patients aged less than 70 years (HR 0.77, p < 0.001); and RITA patients aged less than 70 years also had a survival benefit compared with SV (HR 0.86, p = 0.03). There was no difference in survival for RA versus RITA across all ages. Conclusions For patients aged less than 70 years, the optimal grafting strategy is using either RA or RITA as the second preferred graft. In patients aged 70 years or more, RA and RITA grafting should be used selectively. Multiple arterial grafting using either RA or RITA should be more widely utilized during coronary artery bypass graft surgery for patients less than 70 years of age.
Objective Robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting has emerged as an alternative to traditional coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous intervention for patients with coronary artery ...disease. However, the safety and efficacy of this minimally invasive procedure have not been established in large series. Methods From October 2009 to September 2012, 307 consecutive robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting procedures were performed at a single US institution by 2 surgeons. Isolated, off-pump, left internal thoracic artery to left anterior descending coronary artery grafting was planned via a 3- to 4-cm non–rib-spreading minithoracotomy after robotic left internal thoracic artery harvest in all patients. Hybrid coronary revascularization was planned in 159 patients (51.8%). Of the 199 angiograms (64.8%) performed before discharge, 63 were performed as completion angiograms in a hybrid suite immediately after left internal thoracic artery–left anterior descending artery grafting. Results Thirty-day mortality occurred in 4 patients (1.3%), conversion to sternotomy occurred in 16 patients (5.2%), postoperative myocardial infarction occurred in 5 patients (1.6%), and reexploration for bleeding occurred in 7 patients (2.3%). There was 1 (0.3%) postoperative stroke. For the 199 patients with follow-up angiography before discharge, the left internal thoracic artery was confirmed to be patent (<50% stenosis) in 189 patients (95.0%). Among the 10 patients with significant (≥50% stenosis) defects, 5 had graft occlusion or distal left anterior descending occlusion, 2 had poor flow distal to the anastomosis, and 3 had anastomotic lesions (≥50% stenosis). Among the 63 patients with intraoperative completion angiography, 5 patients underwent surgical graft revision, 3 patients underwent minithoracotomy, and 2 patients underwent conversion to sternotomy. Conclusions Robotic-assisted coronary artery bypass grafting is an effective alternative to traditional coronary artery bypass grafting for patients with single or multivessel coronary artery disease, with comparable short-term clinical and angiographic results.
After 2 years of follow-up in a randomized trial involving 301 patients with moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation undergoing CABG, the addition of mitral-valve repair did not improve left ...ventricular function or remodeling.
Ischemic mitral regurgitation of moderate severity develops in approximately 10% of patients after myocardial infarction.
1
,
2
Mitral regurgitation is caused by the displacement of papillary muscle, leaflet tethering, reduced closing forces, and annular dilatation. Over time, the condition has an adverse effect on the rate of survival free of heart failure.
3
Because most patients with ischemic mitral regurgitation have multivessel coronary artery disease requiring revascularization, surgeons have to consider whether to add mitral-valve repair to coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG).
The appropriate surgical management of moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation at the time of CABG remains controversial. Some experts advocate revascularization alone . . .
This trial compared coronary-artery bypass grafting alone with CABG plus mitral-valve repair in patients with coronary artery disease and moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation. Mitral-valve repair ...provided no apparent benefit and was associated with more neurologic complications.
Each year, approximately 1 million Americans have a myocardial infarction, and nearly 8 million Americans have a history of myocardial infarction.
1
Ischemic mitral regurgitation, which results from functional-valve incompetence due to myocardial injury and adverse left ventricular remodeling, develops in approximately 50% of patients after an infarction, and moderate regurgitation occurs in more than 10% of patients.
2
–
4
Ischemic mitral regurgitation is associated with excess mortality regardless of management.
5
,
6
The valve leaflets and chordal structures in affected patients are “innocent bystanders”; mitral regurgitation results from papillary muscle displacement, leaflet tethering, reduced closing forces, and annular dilatation.
7
–
10
Many patients . . .
Objectives Recent national trends in off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting have not been reported. Methods We analyzed data from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac ...Surgery Database regarding isolated primary coronary artery bypass grafting operations (N = 2,137,841; 1997-2012). The off-pump percentages were calculated in aggregate, by center, and by surgeon. On the basis of the 2007/2008 yearly off-pump volume, the analysis subgroups were “high” (center n > 200, surgeon n > 100), “intermediate” (center n = 50-200, surgeon n = 20-100), and “low” (center n = 1-49, surgeon n = 1-19). Results The use of off-pump procedures peaked in 2002 (23%) and again in 2008 (21%), followed by a progressive decline in off-pump frequency to 17% by 2012. After 2008, off-pump rates declined among both high-volume and intermediate-volume centers and surgeons; little change was observed for low-volume centers or surgeons (off-pump rates = 10% since 2008). By the end of the study period, 84% of centers performed fewer than 50 off-pump cases per year, 34% of surgeons performed no off-pump operations, and 86% of surgeons performed fewer than 20 off-pump cases per year. Except for a higher (7.8%) conversion rate in 2003, the rate for conversions fluctuated approximately 6%. Conclusions Enthusiasm for off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting has been tempered. The percentage of coronary artery bypass grafting operations performed off-pump has steadily declined over the last 5 years, and currently this technique is used in fewer than 1 in 5 patients who undergo surgical coronary revascularization. A minority of surgeons and centers continue to perform off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in most of their patients.
Cardiac surgery is the largest consumer of blood products in medicine; although believed life saving, transfusion carries substantial adverse risks. This study characterizes the relationship between ...transfusion and risk of major infection after cardiac surgery. In all, 5,158 adults were prospectively enrolled to assess infections after cardiac surgery. The most common procedures were isolated coronary artery bypass graft surgery (31%) and isolated valve surgery (30%); 19% were reoperations. Infections were adjudicated by independent infectious disease experts. Multivariable Cox modeling was used to assess the independent effect of blood and platelet transfusions on major infections within 60 ± 5 days of surgery. Red blood cells (RBC) and platelets were transfused in 48% and 31% of patients, respectively. Each RBC unit transfused was associated with a 29% increase in crude risk of major infection ( p < 0.001). Among RBC recipients, the most common infections were pneumonia (3.6%) and bloodstream infections (2%). Risk factors for infection included postoperative RBC units transfused, longer duration of surgery, and transplant or ventricular assist device implantation, in addition to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart failure, and elevated preoperative creatinine. Platelet transfusion decreased the risk of infection ( p = 0.02). Greater attention to management practices that limit RBC use, including cell salvage, small priming volumes, vacuum-assisted venous return with rapid autologous priming, and ultrafiltration, and preoperative and intraoperative measures to elevate hematocrit could potentially reduce occurrence of major postoperative infections.
Background Hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines minimally invasive left internal mammary artery to left anterior descending bypass with percutaneous coronary intervention of non-left ...anterior descending vessels. Its safety and effectiveness compared with conventional CABG have been under studied. Study Design Patients with multivessel disease and/or left main disease who underwent HCR at a US academic center between October 2003 and September 2013 were included. These patients were matched 1:3 to patients treated with CABG using a propensity-score matching algorithm. Conditional logistic regression and Cox regression analyses stratified on matched pairs were performed to evaluate the adjusted association between HCR and short- and long-term outcomes. Results The 30-day composite of death, MI, or stroke after HCR and CABG was 3.3% and 3.1% (odds ratio = 1.07; 95% CI, 0.52–2.21; p = 0.85) in the matched cohort of 1,224 patients (HCR, n =306; CABG, n = 918). Hybrid coronary revascularization was associated with lower rates of in-hospital major morbidity (8.5% vs 15.5%; p = 0.005), lower blood transfusion use (21.6% vs 46.6%; p < 0.001), lower chest tube drainage (690 mL; 25th to 75th percentile: 485 to 1,050 mL vs 920 mL, 25th to 75th percentile: 710 to 1,230 mL; p < 0.001), and shorter postoperative length of stay (<5-day stay: 52.6% vs 38.1%; p = 0.001). During a 3-year follow-up period, mortality was similar after HCR and CABG (8.8% vs 10.2%; hazard ratio = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.55–1.52; p = 0.72). Subgroup analyses in patients stratified by 2-vessel, 3-vessel, left main disease, and by Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk scores rendered similar results. Conclusions The use of HCR appeared to be safe, with faster recovery and similar outcomes when compared with conventional CABG. These findings were consistent irrespective of anatomic or predicted procedural risk.
PDF
