Cardiovascular Surgery, Center for Cardiovascular Regenerative Medicine, Fuwai Hospital, Peking Union Medical College, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.
Circulation. 2010 Apr 27;121(16):1800-8. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.894543. Epub 2010 Apr 12.
Despite its widespread use and short-term efficacy, substantial uncertainty remains about the long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness of off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB).
A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was conducted of 6665 consecutive patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) at our institution during 1999 to 2006. All patients were followed up until September 30, 2008. Short- and long-term outcomes were compared between OPCAB and conventional CABG. The 2 main long-term outcome measures were repeat revascularization and the composite outcome of major vascular events. Cost comparison at 2 years in a propensity-matched sample during follow-up was also a study interest. The overall mean baseline age was 60.3+/-8.6 years, and 17.0% were women. Compared with conventional CABG, patients who underwent OPCAB had lower rates of atrial fibrillation (P=0.003) and requirements for blood transfusion (P=0.03) and ventilation time >24 hours (P<0.001). After an average of 4.5 years of follow-up, the rates of repeat revascularization (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 1.89) and major vascular events (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.09 to 1.39) were significantly higher in the OPCAB than the conventional CABG group. At 2 years, OPCAB was associated with increased additional direct costs per patient compared with conventional CABG and had a similar survival rate.
Compared with conventional CABG, OPCAB is associated with small short-term gain but increased long-term risks of repeat revascularization and major vascular events, especially among high-risk patients. Moreover, OPCAB consumes more resources and is less cost-effective in the long run.
尽管体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术(OPCAB)应用广泛且短期疗效确切,但在长期结果和成本效益方面仍存在较大不确定性。
对 1999 年至 2006 年在我院接受单纯冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的 6665 例连续患者前瞻性收集的数据进行回顾性分析。所有患者均随访至 2008 年 9 月 30 日。比较 OPCAB 与传统 CABG 的短期和长期结果。2 个主要的长期结果测量指标是再次血运重建和主要血管事件的复合结果。在随访期间的倾向匹配样本中,2 年的成本比较也是研究的关注点。总的平均基线年龄为 60.3±8.6 岁,17.0%为女性。与传统 CABG 相比,行 OPCAB 的患者心房颤动发生率较低(P=0.003),输血需求(P=0.03)和通气时间>24 小时(P<0.001)发生率较低。平均随访 4.5 年后,OPCAB 组再次血运重建(校正风险比,1.40;95%置信区间,1.03 至 1.89)和主要血管事件(校正风险比,1.23;95%置信区间,1.09 至 1.39)的发生率明显高于传统 CABG 组。在 2 年时,与传统 CABG 相比,OPCAB 每例患者的直接附加成本增加,且生存率相似。
与传统 CABG 相比,OPCAB 虽然短期获益较小,但长期再次血运重建和主要血管事件的风险增加,尤其是在高危患者中。此外,OPCAB 长期来看消耗更多资源,且成本效益较低。