Usta Engin, Elkrinawi Raoof, Ursulescu Adrian, Nagib Ragi, Mädge Martin, Salehi-Gilani Schahriar, Franke Ulrich Fw
Department of Cardiac and Vascular Surgery, Robert-Bosch-Hospital, Auerbachstr 110, Stuttgart D-70376, Germany.
J Cardiothorac Surg. 2013 Apr 5;8:66. doi: 10.1186/1749-8090-8-66.
Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) on cardiopulmonary bypass (CBP) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. In high-risk patients, doomed for reoperation the adverse effects of CBP may be more striking. We evaluated the results of reoperative CABG (redo-CABG) by either off-pump (OPCAB) or on-pump (ONCAB). Clinical endpoints were perioperative myocardial infarction, mortality, survival and as the most striking difference between prior studies the quality of life (QoL).
We performed a prospective, non-randomized assessment for patients who underwent redo-CABG by redo-OPCAB (n=40) or redo-ONCAB (n=40) at our institution between January 2007 and December 2010. For evaluation of QoL the SF-36 health survey was used with self-administered assessment.
During follow-up 37 of 40 patients were alive in the redo-OPCAB group versus 32 of 40 patients in the redo-ONCAB group (p<0.05). The shorter operation time, less blood loss, fewer perioperative myocardial infarctions, the higher rate of totally arterial revascularisation and shorter intensive care stay were the significantly beneficial differences for patients in the redo-OPCAB group (p<0.05). The 3-year survival rate was higher in the redo-OPCAB group with 81 ± 12% versus 63 ± 9%in the redo-ONCAB group. The quality of life survey did not reveal any significant differences between both groups.
In conclusion, with our present retrospective study, we could demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the redo-OPCAB technique with even higher 3-year survival rate. Both techniques seem to have similar impact on the outcome of patients.
体外循环(CBP)下冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)与显著的发病率和死亡率相关。在高危患者中,注定要再次手术的患者,CBP的不良反应可能更为明显。我们评估了非体外循环(OPCAB)或体外循环(ONCAB)再次冠状动脉旁路移植术(redo-CABG)的结果。临床终点包括围手术期心肌梗死、死亡率、生存率,以及与既往研究最显著的差异——生活质量(QoL)。
我们对2007年1月至2010年12月期间在本机构接受redo-OPCAB(n = 40)或redo-ONCAB(n = 40)再次冠状动脉旁路移植术的患者进行了前瞻性、非随机评估。为了评估生活质量,使用SF-36健康调查问卷进行自我评估。
在随访期间,redo-OPCAB组40例患者中有37例存活,而redo-ONCAB组40例患者中有32例存活(p<0.05)。redo-OPCAB组患者的手术时间更短、失血量更少、围手术期心肌梗死更少、完全动脉血运重建率更高以及重症监护停留时间更短,这些都是显著有益的差异(p<0.05)。redo-OPCAB组的3年生存率更高,为81±12%,而redo-ONCAB组为63±9%。生活质量调查显示两组之间没有任何显著差异。
总之,通过我们目前的回顾性研究,我们可以证明redo-OPCAB技术的安全性和有效性,其3年生存率甚至更高。两种技术似乎对患者的预后有相似的影响。