Attaran S, Harling L, Ashrafian H, Moscarelli M, Casula R, Anderson J, Punjabi P, Athanasiou T
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, UK.
Perfusion. 2014 Sep;29(5):385-96. doi: 10.1177/0267659114525985. Epub 2014 Mar 7.
Coronary revascularization in female patients presents several challenges, including smaller target vessels and smaller conduits. Furthermore, late presentation and more co-morbidities than males may increase complication rates. The aim of this study was to assess whether off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) improves outcomes when compared to on-pump coronary artery bypass (ONCAB) in the female population.
A systematic literature review identified six observational studies, incorporating 23313 patients (n=9596 OPCAB, 13717 ONCAB). These were meta-analyzed using random effects modeling. Heterogeneity, subgroup analysis, quality scoring and publication bias were assessed. The primary endpoints were 30-day mortality and major cardiac, respiratory and renal complications. Secondary endpoints were the number of grafts per patient.
No statistically significant difference was observed in 30-day mortality between the OPCAB and ONCAB groups (4.8% vs. 0.7%; OR 0.96; 95% CI [0.41, 2.24], p=0.92). Significant inter-study heterogeneity was also present (I2=94%) and was not explained by study size or quality. Peri-operative myocardial infarction (OR 0.65; 95% CI [0.51, 0.84], p=0.0009) was significantly lower with OPCAB without significant heterogeneity; however, OPCAB did not significantly alter other morbidity outcomes. OPCAB was associated with a trend towards fewer grafts per patient than ONCAB.
OPCAB is a safe alternative to ONCAB in the surgical revascularisation of female patients and may reduce post-operative myocardial infarction (MI). However, this does not translate into a reduction in 30-day mortality and OPCAB does not significantly improve other cardiovascular, renal or neurological outcomes. Late outcome data remains lacking and a well-structured, randomized trial is required to answer vital questions regarding the effect of OPCAB on women in the long-term.
女性患者的冠状动脉血运重建面临诸多挑战,包括目标血管和移植血管较细。此外,与男性相比,发病较晚且合并症更多可能会增加并发症发生率。本研究的目的是评估在女性人群中,非体外循环冠状动脉搭桥术(OPCAB)与体外循环冠状动脉搭桥术(ONCAB)相比是否能改善预后。
一项系统的文献综述纳入了6项观察性研究,共23313例患者(n = 9596例OPCAB,13717例ONCAB)。使用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。评估了异质性、亚组分析、质量评分和发表偏倚。主要终点为30天死亡率以及主要的心脏、呼吸和肾脏并发症。次要终点为每位患者的移植血管数量。
OPCAB组和ONCAB组在30天死亡率方面未观察到统计学上的显著差异(4.8%对0.7%;OR 0.96;95% CI [0.41, 2.24],p = 0.92)。研究间也存在显著的异质性(I2 = 94%),且未通过研究规模或质量得到解释。OPCAB组围手术期心肌梗死发生率显著较低(OR 0.65;95% CI [0.51, 0.84],p = 0.0009),且无显著异质性;然而,OPCAB并未显著改变其他发病结局。与ONCAB相比,OPCAB组每位患者的移植血管数量有减少的趋势。
在女性患者的外科血运重建中,OPCAB是ONCAB的一种安全替代方法,可能会降低术后心肌梗死(MI)的发生率。然而,这并未转化为30天死亡率的降低,且OPCAB并未显著改善其他心血管、肾脏或神经学结局。仍缺乏长期结局数据,需要进行一项结构良好的随机试验来回答有关OPCAB对女性长期影响的关键问题。