OBJECTIVES: On-pump beating heart technique for myocardial revascularization has been used successfully among both low and high risk patients. Its application among low ejection fraction patients is limited. The aim of our study is to evaluate this technique among patients with low ejection fraction and to compare results with off-pump bypass technique. METHODS: This retrospective study includes 137 patients with ejection fraction below 0.35 who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass surgery. 39 patients underwent myocardial revascularization using on-pump beating heart (ONCAB/BH), while 98 patients had off-pump beating heart (OPCAB). Different preoperative, operative and postoperative variables were evaluated among both groups. RESULTS: Patients profiles and risk factors were similar among both groups, except for the number of patients undergoing redo CABG which was significantly higher among ONCAB/BH (13% vs 3%; p = 0.025). Ejection fraction (EF) varied from 10-34%. The mean EF for patients who underwent ONCAB/BH was 28 ± 6 in comparison to 26 ± 5 for OPCAB patients (P = 0.093). Predicted risk for surgery according to EuroSCORE was similar among both groups (P = 0.443). The number of grafts performed per patient was significantly more among patients who underwent ONCAB/BH (2.2 ± 0.7 Vs 1.7 ± 0.7; P = 0.002). Completeness of revascularization was significantly greater in the ONCAB/BH patients (72% Vs 46%, P = 0.015). The incidence of hospital mortality and combined major morbidity was more among ONCAB/BH in comparison to OPCAB, but the difference was not significant. However, the incidence of blood loss, ventricular arrhythmias, inotropic support, ICU, hospital stay and blood transfusion were significantly greater among patients who underwent ONCAB/BH. CONCLUSIONS: On-pump beating heart technique can be used in myocardial revascularization among patients with left ventricular dysfunction. The technique was found to be associated with better myocardial revascularization when compared with OPCAB technique. However, the incidence of morbidity and mortality was more than OPCAB.
OBJECTIVES: On-pump beating heart technique for myocardial revascularization has been used successfully among both low and high risk patients. Its application among low ejection fraction patients is limited. The aim of our study is to evaluate this technique among patients with low ejection fraction and to compare results with off-pump bypass technique. METHODS: This retrospective study includes 137 patients with ejection fraction below 0.35 who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass surgery. 39 patients underwent myocardial revascularization using on-pump beating heart (ONCAB/BH), while 98 patients had off-pump beating heart (OPCAB). Different preoperative, operative and postoperative variables were evaluated among both groups. RESULTS:Patients profiles and risk factors were similar among both groups, except for the number of patients undergoing redo CABG which was significantly higher among ONCAB/BH (13% vs 3%; p = 0.025). Ejection fraction (EF) varied from 10-34%. The mean EF for patients who underwent ONCAB/BH was 28 ± 6 in comparison to 26 ± 5 for OPCAB patients (P = 0.093). Predicted risk for surgery according to EuroSCORE was similar among both groups (P = 0.443). The number of grafts performed per patient was significantly more among patients who underwent ONCAB/BH (2.2 ± 0.7 Vs 1.7 ± 0.7; P = 0.002). Completeness of revascularization was significantly greater in the ONCAB/BH patients (72% Vs 46%, P = 0.015). The incidence of hospital mortality and combined major morbidity was more among ONCAB/BH in comparison to OPCAB, but the difference was not significant. However, the incidence of blood loss, ventricular arrhythmias, inotropic support, ICU, hospital stay and blood transfusion were significantly greater among patients who underwent ONCAB/BH. CONCLUSIONS: On-pump beating heart technique can be used in myocardial revascularization among patients with left ventricular dysfunction. The technique was found to be associated with better myocardial revascularization when compared with OPCAB technique. However, the incidence of morbidity and mortality was more than OPCAB.
Authors: L P Perrault; P Menasché; J Peynet; B Faris; A Bel; T de Chaumaray; C Gatecel; B Touchot; G Bloch; J M Moalic Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 1997-11 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Ahmad K Darwazah; Raed A Abu Sham'a; Ezzidin Hussein; Mohammad H Hawari; Hasan Ismail Journal: J Card Surg Date: 2006 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.620
Authors: E Prifti; M Bonacchi; G Giunti; G Frati; P Proietti; M Leacche; A Salica; G Sani; G Brancaccio Journal: J Card Surg Date: 2000 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 1.620
Authors: Ardawan Julian Rastan; Hartmuth Bruno Bittner; Jan Fritz Gummert; Thomas Walther; Claudia V Schewick; Evaldes Girdauskas; Friedrich Wilhelm Mohr Journal: Eur J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2005-04-08 Impact factor: 4.191
Authors: Innes Y P Wan; Ahmed A Arifi; Song Wan; Johnson H Y Yip; Alan D L Sihoe; K H Thung; Eric M C Wong; Anthony P C Yim Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 5.209