Influence of Innovative Techniques on Midterm Results in Patients with Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass and Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass

  • Ioannis K. Toumpoulis
  • Constantine E. Anagnostopoulos
  • Demosthenes G. Katritsis
  • Hani Shennib
  • Joseph J. DeRose
  • Daniel G. Swistel
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1532/hsf.1062

Abstract

Background: There is a paucity of midterm results comparing the efficacy of minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass (MIDCAB) and off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) with standard coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). In addition, the advent of innovative techniques may have improved midterm results for patients who undergo MIDCAB and OPCAB (MID-OPCAB). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the midterm survival results of higher-risk patient groups who have undergone CABG or MID-OPCAB with or without the use of innovative techniques.

Methods: From January 1992 through March 2002, 3670 consecutive patients underwent coronary artery bypass procedures, and their predicted surgical risks were calculated according to the logistic EuroSCORE. The cases of 52 MIDCAB patients and 1796 CABG patients with similar higher-risk EuroSCOREs (11.5 versus 11.4, respectively) who underwent operations from January 1992 to December 1997 were compared (study A). The cases of 89 patients with MID-OPCAB (employing "innovative techniques") and 796 patients with CABG (EuroSCORE, 13.2 versus 13.3, respectively) whose operations took place between 1998 and 2002 were also compared (study B). The National Death Index was used to access mortality data, and Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed for each group of patients. Numbers of arterial grafts, numbers of anastomoses, major complications, in-hospital lengths of stay (LOS), and 30-day mortality rates were noted. Results: In study A, there were no significant differences in the 30-day mortality rates (2.5% versus 3.9%), incidences of major complications (11.5% versus 16.6%), and LOS (13 days versus 11.7 days) for the MID-OPCAB and CABG patients, respectively. CABG patients received more arterial grafts (47.1% versus 28.9%; P = .011), received more distal anastomoses (3.4 versus 2.7; P < .001), and had better survival as estimated by Kaplan-Meier curves (94.5 months versus 82.1 months; P = .023). In study B, there were no differences in 30-day mortality rates (3.1% versus 2.3%) and incidences of major complications (10.1% versus 12.7%) for MID-OPCAB and CABG patients, respectively. CABG patients received more arterial grafts (72% versus 57.3%; P = .004) and more distal anastomoses (3.5 versus 2.8; P < .001). However, LOS was shorter for MID-OPCAB patients (7.2 days versus 9.6 days; P = .019), and there was no difference in survival time as estimated by Kaplan-Meier curves (47 months versus 46.4 months; P = .534).

Conclusions: The advent of innovative surgery significantly improved LOS and "equalized" the rate of survival to 5 years in higher-risk MID-OPCAB patients, compared with similar-risk CABG patients.

References

Ascione R, Lloyd CT, Gomes WJ, et al. 1999. Beating versus arrested heart revascularization: evaluation of myocardial function in a prospective randomized study. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 15:685-90.\nBaumgartner FJ, Gheissari A, Capouya ER, et al. 1999. Technical aspects of total revascularization in off-pump coronary bypass via sternotomy approach. Ann Thorac Surg 67:1653-8.\nCleveland JC Jr, Shroyer AL, Chen AY, Peterson E, Grover FL. 2001. Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting decreases risk-adjusted mortality and morbidity. Ann Thorac Surg 72:1282-8.\nDetter C, Reichenspurner H, Boehm DH, et al. 2002. Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCAB) and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB): two techniques for beating heart surgery. Heart Surg Forum 5:157-62.\nGundry SR, Romano MA, Shattuck OH, Razzouk AJ, Bailey LL. 1998. Seven-year follow-up of coronary artery bypasses performed with and without cardiopulmonary bypass. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 115:1273-7.\nHaase M, Sharma A, Fielitz A, et al. 2003. On-pump coronary artery surgery versus off-pump exclusive arterial coronary grafting: a matched cohort comparison. Ann Thorac Surg 75:62-7.\nYacoub M. 2001. Off-pump coronary bypass surgery: in search of an identity. Circulation 104:1743-5.\nYokoyama T, Baumgartner FJ, Gheissari A, et al. 2000. Off-pump versus on-pump coronary bypass in high-risk subgroups. Ann Thorac Surg 70:1546-50.\nAbu-Omar Y, Taggart DP. 2002. Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Lancet 360:327-30.\nAl Ruzzeh S, Nakamura K, Athanasiou T, et al. 2003. Does off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) surgery improve the outcome in high-risk patients?: a comparative study of 1398 high-risk patients. Eur J Car diothorac Surg 23:50-5.\nAngelini GD, Taylor FC, Reeves BC, Ascione R. 2002. Early and midterm outcome after off-pump and on-pump surgery in Beating Heart Against Cardioplegic Arrest Studies (BHACAS 1 and 2): a pooled analysis of two randomised controlled trials. Lancet 359:1194-9.\nArom KV, Flavin TF, Emery RW, et al. 2000. Safety and efficacy of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Ann Thorac Surg 69:704-10.\nPuskas JD, Thourani VH, Marshall JJ, et al. 2001. Clinical outcomes, angiographic patency, and resource utilization in 200 consecutive off-pump coronary bypass patients. Ann Thorac Surg 71:1477-83.\nPuskas JD, Wright CE, Ronson RS, et al. 1999. Clinical outcomes and angiographic patency in 125 consecutive off-pump coronary bypass patients. Heart Surg Forum 2:216-21.\nRiha M, Danzmayr M, Nagele G, et al. 2002. Off pump coronary artery bypass grafting in EuroSCORE high and low risk patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 21:193-8.\nRose EA. 2003. Off-pump coronary-artery bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 348:379-80.\nShennib H. 2001. A renaissance in cardiovascular surgery: endovascular and device-based revascularization. Ann Thorac Surg 72:S993-4.\nSpooner TH, Dyrud PE, Monson BK, Dixon GE, Robinson LD. 1998. Coronary artery bypass on the beating heart with the Octopus: a North American experience. Ann Thorac Surg 66:1032-5.\nvan Dijk D, Nierich AP, Jansen EW, et al. 2001. Early outcome after off-pump versus on-pump coronary bypass surgery: results from a randomized study. Circulation 104:1761-6.\nHart JC, Spooner TH, Pym J, et al. 2000. A review of 1,582 consecutive Octopus off-pump coronary bypass patients. Ann Thorac Surg 70:1017-20.\nMagee MJ, Jablonski KA, Stamou SC, et al. 2002. Elimination of cardiopulmonary bypass improves early survival for multivessel coronary artery bypass patients. Ann Thorac Surg 73:1196-202.\nMehran R, Dangas G, Stamou SC, et al. 2000. One-year clinical outcome after minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass. Circulation 102:2799-802.\nMichel P, Roques F, Nashef SAM. 2003. Logistic or additive EuroSCORE for high-risk patients. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 23:684-7.\nNashef SA, Roques F, Hammill BG, et al. 2002. Validation of European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) in North American cardiac surgery. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 22:101-5.\nNathoe HM, van Dijk D, Jansen EW, et al. 2003. A comparison of on-pump and off-pump coronary bypass surgery in low-risk patients. N Engl J Med 348:394-402.\n
Published
2005-01-04
How to Cite
Toumpoulis, I. K., Anagnostopoulos, C. E., Katritsis, D. G., Shennib, H., DeRose, J. J., & Swistel, D. G. (2005). Influence of Innovative Techniques on Midterm Results in Patients with Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass and Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass. The Heart Surgery Forum, 7(1), E27-E32. https://doi.org/10.1532/hsf.1062
Issue
Vol 7 No 1 (2004)
Section
Articles

Author Disclosure & Copyright Transfer Agreement

In order to publish the original work of another person(s), The Heart Surgery Forum® must receive an acknowledgment of the Author Agreement and Copyright Transfer Statement transferring to Forum Multimedia Publishing, L.L.C., a subsidiary of Carden Jennings Publishing Co., Ltd. the exclusive rights to print and distribute the author(s) work in all media forms. Failure to check Copyright Transfer agreement box below will delay publication of the manuscript.

A current form follows:

The author(s) hereby transfer(s), assign(s), or otherwise convey(s) all copyright ownership of the manuscript submitted to Forum Multimedia Publishing, LLC (Publisher). The copyright transfer covers the exclusive rights to reproduce and distribute the article and the material contained therein throughout the world in all languages and in all media of expression now known or later developed, including but not limited to reprints, photographic reproduction, microfilm, electronic data processing (including programming, storage, and transmission to other electronic data record(s), or any other reproductions of similar nature), and translations.

However, Publisher grants back to the author(s) the following:

  1. The right to make and distribute copies of all or part of this work for use of the author(s) in teaching;
  2. The right to use, after publication in The Heart Surgery Forum, all or part of the material from this work in a book by the author(s), or in a collection of work by the author(s);
  3. The royalty-free right to make copies of this work for internal distribution within the institution/company that employs the author(s) subject to the provisions below for a work-made-for-hire;
  4. The right to use figures and tables from this work, and up to 250 words of text, for any purpose;
  5. The right to make oral presentations of material from this work.

Publisher reserves the right to grant or refuse permission to third parties to republish all or part of the article or translations thereof. To republish, such third parties must obtain written permission from the Publisher. (This is in accordance with the Copyright Statute, United States Code, Title 17. Exception: If all authors were bona fide officers or employees of the U.S. Government at the time the paper was prepared, the work is a “work of the US Government” (prepared by an officer or employee of the US Government as part of official duties), and therefore is not subject to US copyright; such exception should be indicated on signature lines. If this work was prepared under US Government contract or grant, the US Government may reproduce, royalty-free, all or portions of this work and may authorize others to do so, for official US Government purposes only, if the US Government contract or grant so requires.

I have participated in the conception and design of this work and in the writing of the manuscript and take public responsibility for it. Neither this manuscript nor one with substantially similar content under my authorship has been published, has been submitted for publication elsewhere, or will be submitted for publication elsewhere while under consideration by The Heart Surgery Forum, except as described in an attachment. I have reviewed this manuscript (original version) and approve its submission. If I am listed above as corresponding author, I will provide all authors with information regarding this manuscript and will obtain their approval before submitting any revision. I attest to the validity, accuracy, and legitimacy of the content of the manuscript and understand that Publisher assumes no responsibility for the validity, accuracy, and legitimacy of its content. I warrant that this manuscript is original with me and that I have full power to make this Agreement. I warrant that it contains no matter that is libelous or otherwise unlawful or that invades individual privacy or infringes any copyright or other proprietary right. I agree to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless of and from any claim made against Publisher that relates to or arises out of the publication of the manuscript and agree that this indemnification shall include payment of all costs and expenses relating to the defense of any such claim, including all reasonable attorney’s fees.

I warrant that I have no financial interest in the drugs, devices, or procedures described in the manuscript (except as disclosed in the attached statement).

I state that the institutional Human Subjects Committee and/or the Ethics Committee approved the clinical protocol reported in this manuscript for the use of experimental techniques, drugs, or devices in human subjects and appropriate informed consent documents were utilized.

Furthermore, I state that any and all animals used for experimental purposes received humane care in USDA registered facilities in compliance with the “Principles of Laboratory Animal Care” formulated by the National Society for Medical Research and the “Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals” prepared by the Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources and published by the National Institutes of Health (NIH Publication No. 85-23, revised 1985).