Demaria Roland G, Carrier Michel, Fortier Simon, Martineau Raymond, Fortier Annick, Cartier Raymond, Pellerin Michel, Hébert Yves, Bouchard Denis, Pagé Pierre, Perrault Louis P
Research Center and Department of Surgery, Montreal Heart Institute, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Circulation. 2002 Sep 24;106(12 Suppl 1):I5-10.
Off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery (OPCAB) has been revived and has gained popularity, although the exact subsets of patients who might benefit most from this technique are unknown. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the results of coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG) in octogenarians using cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) or OPCAB techniques.
Over a 5-year period (1995-1999), 125 patients older than 80 years of age were operated for isolated myocardial revascularization (63 using CPB and 62 with OPCAB). There was no statistically significant difference in preoperative comorbidities between groups or in mean left ventricular ejection fraction (54.5+/-15.3% in the CPB group and 50.9+/-13.5% in the OPCAB group, respectively). The mean number of distal anastomosis per patient was 2.9 in CPB group and 2.6 in OPCAB group (P=ns). The majority of patients in both groups had unstable angina and were operated on an urgent basis. The operative mortality was 15.9% in the CPB group and 4.8% in the OPCAB group (P=0.04). There were 4 postoperative strokes (6.3%) in the CPB group and none (0%) in the OPCAB group (P=0.04). The percentage of patients transfused was 92.1% in the CPB group and 72.6% in the OPCAB group (P<0.01). Postoperative myocardial infarction occurred in 11.3% in the CPB group and 14.5% in the OPCAB group (P=NS). For all the parameters entered in the multivariate analysis with logistic regression model, the type of surgery (CPB or OPCAB) was an independent predictor of operative mortality and stroke (P=0.0375). The odds ratio (OR) indicates that operative mortality and stroke occur 4 times (OR=4.171) more often in CPB patients than in OPCAB patients. Follow-up showed no significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of cardiac events and mortality.
This retrospective study suggests a benefit of OPCAB in terms of operative mortality and stroke for octogenarian patients when compared with CPB in our institution.
非体外循环冠状动脉搭桥手术(OPCAB)已重新兴起并受到欢迎,尽管最能从该技术中获益的具体患者亚组尚不清楚。这项回顾性研究的目的是比较使用体外循环(CPB)或OPCAB技术对八旬老人进行冠状动脉搭桥手术(CABG)的结果。
在5年期间(1995 - 1999年),125例年龄超过80岁的患者接受了单纯心肌血运重建手术(63例使用CPB,62例使用OPCAB)。两组患者术前合并症或平均左心室射血分数无统计学显著差异(CPB组为54.5±15.3%,OPCAB组为50.9±13.5%)。CPB组每位患者的平均远端吻合口数量为2.9个,OPCAB组为2.6个(P = 无显著差异)。两组中的大多数患者患有不稳定型心绞痛且接受了急诊手术。CPB组的手术死亡率为15.9%,OPCAB组为4.8%(P = 0.04)。CPB组有4例术后中风(6.3%),OPCAB组无(0%)(P = 0.04)。CPB组输血患者的百分比为92.1%,OPCAB组为72.6%(P < 0.01)。CPB组术后心肌梗死发生率为11.3%,OPCAB组为14.5%(P = 无显著差异)。对于逻辑回归模型多变量分析中纳入的所有参数,手术类型(CPB或OPCAB)是手术死亡率和中风的独立预测因素(P = 0.0375)。优势比(OR)表明,CPB患者发生手术死亡率和中风的频率是OPCAB患者的4倍(OR = 4.