Aron Adrian, Klinger Troy A, McConnell Timothy R
Department of Exercise Science and Athletics, Bloomsburg University, Bloomsburg, PA, USA.
J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2007 Jan-Feb;27(1):35-41. doi: 10.1097/01.hcr.0000265018.11037.1a.
Clinical evidence supports lower morbidity with off-pump coronary revascularization surgery as well as superior short- and mid-term outcomes, equivalent graft patency, and reduced cost. The purpose of this study was to compare cardiac rehabilitation (CR) outcomes between patients undergoing on-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery.
Data were retrospectively examined for patients who participated in CR between 1996 and 2004. Two hundred ninety-five patients who underwent bypass surgery and completed at least 80% of their 36 required sessions were divided into on-pump and off-pump groups. Pre- and post-CR measures included grip strength, flexibility, energy expended during class, quality of life, and self-efficacy.
Both groups were similar with respect to age, sex, ejection fraction, and mean number of grafts. There were no statistical differences between the on-pump and off-pump groups (P > .05) for weight, abdominal and hip circumferences, grip strength, flexibility, and total energy expenditure. In addition, there were no between-group differences regarding quality of life and self-efficacy. Grip strength, flexibility, and energy expenditure during class improved with CR regardless of the surgical procedure (P = .001). Quality of life (P = .001) and self-efficacy (P = .001) also improved.
The present data support the concept that although there are clinical advantages to off-pump surgery, there is no benefit over on-pump surgery regarding CR. Subsequently, patients undergoing off-pump surgery should be managed similarly as their on-pump counterparts.
