Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life after Coronary Revascularization
AbstractThe use of patient-oriented outcomes, in particular health-related quality if life (HRQOL), to evaluate coronary revascularization is continuously increasing. Current data underline that patients undergoing conventional CABG show a tremendous improvement of HRQOL status as early as 3 months postoperatively. There seems to be no clear benefit concerning HRQOL for off-pump coronary surgery versus conventional CABG. The benefits of minimal invasive CABG via mini-thoracotomy are compromised by increased incidence of pain during the immediate postoperative period. Totally endoscopic approaches seem to be more effective with regard to pain reduction and resume of every day activities. Compared to catheter-based interventions there is evidence that conventional CABG offers significant advantages over PCI. The influence of drug-eluting stents and newer surgical techniques on HRQOL remains to be determined. Inclusion of HRQOL data in CABG and PCI databases can play a central role in order to identify patient groups who benefit the most from each revascularization strategy.
Weintraub WS, Mauldin PD, Becker F, Kosinski AS, King SB. 1995. A comparison of the costs and quality of life after coronary angioplasty or coronary surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease: results from the Emory angioplasty versus surgical trial (EAST). Circulation 92:2831-40.nLegrand VM, Serruys PW, Unger F, et al. for the Revascularization Therapy Study (ARTS) Investigators. 2004. Three-year outcome after coronary stenting versus bypass surgery for the treatment of multivessel disease. Circulation 109(9):1114-20.nMorgan JA, Peacock JC, Kohmoto T, et al. 2004. Robotic techniques improve quality of life in patients undergoing atrial septal defect repair. Ann Thorac Surg 77:1328-33.nNewman MF, Kirchner JL, Phillips-Bute B, et al. 2001. Longitudinal assessment of neurocognitive function after coronary artery bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 344:395-402.nZhang Z, Mahoney EM, Stables RH, et al. Disease-specific health status after stent-assisted percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass surgery. Circulation 108:1694-700.nRumsfeld JS, McWhinney S, Mcarthy M, et al. 1999. Health-related quality of life as a predictor of mortality following coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Participants of the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group on Processes, Structures, and Outcomes of Care in Cardiac Surgery. JAMA 281(14):1298-303.nJärvinen O, Saarinen T, Julkunen J, Laurikka J, Huhtala H, Tarkka MR. 2004. Improved health-related quality of life after coronary artery bypass grafting is unrelated to the use of cardiopulmonary bypass. World J Surg 28:1030-5.nGrossi EA, Zakow PK, Ribakove G, et al. 1999. Comparison of postoperative pain, stress response, and quality of life in port access vs. standard sternotomy coronary bypass patients. Eur J Cardiothor Surg 16 (Suppl 2): S39-42.nHerlitz J, Bandrup-Wognsen G, Caidahl K, et al. 2003. Improvement and factors associated with improvement in quality of life during 10 years after coronary artery bypass grafting. Coron Art Dis 14:509-17.nPuskas JD, Williams WH, Mahoney EM, et al. 2004. Off-pump versus conventional coronary artery bypass grafting: early and 1-year graft patency, cost and quality of life outcomes: a randomized trial. JAMA 291(15):1841-50.nWriting group for the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation >(BARI) investigators. 1997. Five-year clinical and functional outcome comparing bypass surgery and angioplasty in patients with multivessel coronary disease: a multicenter randomized trial. JAMA 277:715-21.nOtt H, Bonatti J, Mueller L, Chevtchik O, Riha M, Lauffer G. Robotically Enhanced Cardiac Surgery. Eur Surg. 2002;34:183-189.nConacher ID, Doig JC, Rivas L, Pridie AK. 1993. Intercostal neuralgia associated with internal mammary artery grafting. Anesthesia 48:1070-1.nSjöland H, Caidahl K, Wiklund I, et al. 1997. Impact of coronary artery bypass grafting on various aspects of quality of life. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 12:612-9.nTaggart DP, Browne SM, Halligan PW, et al. 1999. Is cardiopulmonary bypass still the cause of cognitive dysfunction after cardiac operations? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 118:414-21.nWährborg P, on behalf of the CABRI Trialists. 1999. Quality of life after coronary angioplasty or bypass surgery. 1-year follow-up in the coronary angioplasty versus bypass revascularization investigation (CABRI) Trial. Eur Heart J 20:653-8.nSmith HJ, Taylor R, Mitchell A. 2000. A comparison of four quality of life instruments in cardiac patients: SF-36, QLI, QLMI, and SEIQoL. Heart 84:390-4.nSpeigelhalter D, Gore S, Jones D, et al. 1992. Quality of life measures in health care. II: Resource allocation. BMJ 305:1205-9.nWalther T, Falk V, Metz S, et al. 1999. Pain and quality of life after minimally invasive versus conventional cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg 67:1643-7.nYun KL, Sintek CF, Fletcher AD, et al. 1999. Time related quality of life after elective cardiac operation. Ann Thorac Surg 68(4):1314-20.nSchachner T, Bonaros N, Laufer G, Bonatti J. 2004. The ESTECH remote access perfusion cannula in minimal invasive cardiac surgery. Heart Surg Forum 7(6):632-5.nBonatti J, Schachner T, Bernecker O, et al. 2004. Robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass: program development and learning curve issues. J Thor Cardiovasc Surg 127(2):504-10.nBiglioli P, Antona C, Alamanni F, et al. 2000. Minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting: midterm results and quality of life. Ann Thorac Surg 70:456-60.nBonaros N, Schachner T, Oehlinger A, et al. 2004. 7th Annual Meeting of the International Society of Minimal Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery, London, June 23rd-26th 2004 (abstract).nBonatti J, Schachner T, Bonaros N, et al. Robotic suturing of coronary artery bypass grafts through sternotomy - an important step towards totally endoscopic procedures. Heart Surg Forum, in press.nSpertus JA, Nerella R, Kettlekamp R, et al. 2005. Risk of restenosis and health status outcomes for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Circulation 111:768-73.nDefalque RJ, Bromley JJ. 1989. Post-sternotomy neuralgia: a new pain syndrome. Anesth Analg 69:81-2.nDolan P. 1997. Modeling valuations for Euro Qol health states. Med Care 35:1095-108.nEisenberg E, Pultorak Y, Pud D, Bar-El Y. 2001. Prevalence and characteristics of post coronary artery bypass graft surgery pain (PCP). Pain 92:11-7.nGrichnik KP, Ijsselmuiden AJ, D'Amico TA, et al. 1999. Cognitive decline after major non cardiac operations: a preliminary prospective study. Ann Thorac Surg 68:1786-91.nJärvinen O, Saarinen T, Juhani Julkunen, Huhtala H, Tarkka MR. 2003. Changes in health-related quality of life and functional capacity following coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Eur J Cardiothor Surg 24:750-6.nEagle KA, Guyton RA, Davidoff R, et al. 2004. ACC/AHA 2004 guide line update for coronary artery bypass graft surgery: Summary article: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (Committee to update the 1999 guidelines for coronary artery bypass graft surgery). Circulation 110: 1168-76.nEdgerton JR, Dewey TM, Magee MJ, et al. 2003. Conversion in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: an analysis of predictors and out
How to Cite
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:
- The right to make and distribute copies of all or part of this work for use of the author(s) in teaching;
- 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);
- 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;
- The right to use figures and tables from this work, and up to 250 words of text, for any purpose;
- 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).