Clinical Research Unit, Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia 30308, USA.
Curr Opin Cardiol. 2010 Nov;25(6):583-8. doi: 10.1097/HCO.0b013e32833f04b0.
In this review, we will highlight recent studies comparing off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery with traditional on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery.
Current literature comparing off-pump vs. on-pump coronary artery bypass has failed to demonstrate the superiority of one technique over the other. Small prospective randomized controlled trials continue to show equivalent in-hospital outcomes and continue to raise concerns about vein graft patency and completeness of revascularization. Larger observational analyses are better powered to statistically compare in-hospital outcomes in both low and high-risk patients and in general have shown more favorable in-hospital outcomes and equivalent long-term outcomes with off-pump compared with on-pump coronary artery bypass.
Off-pump coronary artery bypass continues to be a useful technique for coronary revascularization. The benefits of off-pump techniques may be more apparent for patients at high risk for complications associated with cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic manipulation.
在本次综述中,我们将重点介绍近期比较非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术与传统体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术的研究。
目前比较非体外循环与体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术的文献未能证明一种技术优于另一种技术。小型前瞻性随机对照试验继续显示院内结局相当,并持续对静脉移植物通畅性和血运重建的完整性提出担忧。较大规模的观察性分析更有能力在低危和高危患者中对院内结局进行统计学比较,并且通常显示非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术的院内结局更有利,与体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术的长期结局相当。
非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术仍然是冠状动脉血运重建的一种有效技术。对于因体外循环和主动脉操作相关并发症风险高的患者,非体外循环技术的益处可能更为明显。