| Literature DB >> 30286625 |
Whady Hueb1, Paulo Cury Rezende1, Bernard J Gersh2, Paulo Rogério Soares1, Desidério Favarato1, Eduardo Gomes Lima1, Cibele Larrosa Garzillo1, Fabio B Jatene1, José Antonio Franchini Ramires1, Roberto Kalil Filho1.
Abstract
It was a randomized trial, and 308 patients undergoing revascularization were randomly assigned: 155 to off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) and 153 to on-pump coronary artery bypass (ONCAB). End points were freedom from death, myocardial infarction, revascularization, and cerebrovascular accidents. The rates for 10-year, event-free survival for ONCAB versus OPCAB were 69.6% and 64%, (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86-1.02; P = .41), respectively. Adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratio was similar (HR: 0.92; 95% CI 0.61-1.38, P = .68). A difference occurred between the duration of OPCAB and ONCAB, respectively (4.9 ± 1.5 vs 6.6 ± 1.1 h, P < .001). Statistical differences occurred between OPCAB and ONCAB in the length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay (20 ± 2.5 vs 48 ± 10 hours, P < .001), time to extubation (5.5 ± 4.2 vs 10.2 ± 3.5 hours, P < .001), hospital stay (6.7 ± 1.4 vs 9.2 ± 1.3 days, P < .001), higher incidence of atrial fibrillation (AF; 33 vs 5 patients, P < .001), and blood requirements (46 vs 64 patients, P < .001). Grafts per patient was higher in ONCAB (3.15 vs 2.55 grafts, P < .001). No difference existed between the groups in primary composite end points at 10-year follow-up. Although OPCAB surgery was related to a lower number of grafts and higher incidence of AF, it had no effects related to long-term outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: Coronary artery disease; off-pump coronary artery bypass; on-pump coronary artery bypass
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30286625 DOI: 10.1177/0003319718804402
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Angiology ISSN: 0003-3197 Impact factor: 3.619