Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Università Campus Bio-Medico di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Golden Jubilee National Hospital, Clydebank, Glasgow, UK.
J Geriatr Cardiol. 2016 Jan;13(1):23-30. doi: 10.11909/j.issn.1671-5411.2016.01.008.
Geriatric patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) are a challenging group to treat; these cases elicit discussion within heart teams regarding the actual benefit of undertaking major surgery on these patients and often lead to abandon the surgical option. Percutaneous procedures represent an important option, but coronary anatomy may be unfavorable. Off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) provides good quality graft on left anterior descending (LAD) without exposing the patient to cardiopulmonary bypass, and might be the ideal choice in patients with multiple comorbidities, not eligible to percutaneous or on-pump procedures. The objective of this study was to compare survival during a mid-term follow-up in high-risk patients with no percutaneous alternative, either treated with OPCAB or discharged in medical therapy.
We retrospectively evaluated from June 2008 to June 2013, 83 high-risk patients with multivessel CAD were included: 42 were treated with incomplete off-pump revascularization using left internal mammary artery (LIMA) on LAD; 41 were discharged in optimal medical therapy (OMT), having refused surgery. Follow-up ended in March 2015, with a telephonic interview. Primary endpoint was survival from all-cause mortality; secondary endpoints were survival from cardiac-related mortality and freedom from non-fatal major adverse cardiac events (MACEs).
During follow up, 11 deaths in OPCAB group and 27 deaths in OMT group occurred. Death was due to cardiac factors in 6 and 15 patients, respectively. MACEs were observed in 6 patients in OPCAB group and in 4 patients in OMT group. With regards to survival from all-cause mortality, patients who underwent OPCAB survived more than those discharged in OMT (Log Rank < 0.001), and OMT group carries a propensity score-adjusted hazard ratio of 3.862 (P < 0.001). With regards to survival from cardiac-related events, patients who underwent OPCAB survived more than those discharged in OMT (Log Rank = 0.002), and OMT group carries a propensity score-adjusted hazard ratio of 3.663 (P = 0.010). There is no statistically significant difference concerning freedom from MACEs (Log Rank = 0.273).
For high-risk patients with multivessel CAD, not eligible to on-pump complete revascularization surgery or percutaneous procedures, incomplete revascularization with OPCAB LIMA-on-LAD offers benefits in survival when compared to OMT alone.
患有多支冠状动脉疾病(CAD)的老年患者是一组具有挑战性的治疗对象;心脏团队在讨论这些患者的实际获益时,往往会考虑到为这些患者进行大手术的实际获益,并且常常会放弃手术选择。经皮介入治疗是一种重要的选择,但冠状动脉解剖结构可能不理想。非体外循环冠状动脉旁路移植术(OPCAB)可在不使患者暴露于体外循环的情况下,为左前降支(LAD)提供高质量的移植物,并且对于有多种合并症、不适合经皮或体外循环手术的患者来说,可能是理想的选择。本研究的目的是比较高危患者在中期随访期间的生存率,这些患者没有经皮治疗的选择,要么接受 OPCAB 治疗,要么接受药物治疗。
我们回顾性评估了 2008 年 6 月至 2013 年 6 月期间 83 例患有多支 CAD 的高危患者,其中 42 例采用左侧内乳动脉(LIMA)在 LAD 上进行不完全非体外循环血运重建;41 例在最佳药物治疗(OMT)下出院,拒绝手术。随访于 2015 年 3 月结束,通过电话访谈进行。主要终点是全因死亡率的生存率;次要终点是心脏相关死亡率的生存率和非致命性主要不良心脏事件(MACEs)的无事件生存率。
在随访期间,OPCAB 组有 11 例死亡,OMT 组有 27 例死亡。死亡原因分别为心脏因素 6 例和 15 例。OPCAB 组有 6 例发生 MACE,OMT 组有 4 例发生 MACE。全因死亡率方面,接受 OPCAB 治疗的患者生存率高于接受 OMT 治疗的患者(Log Rank<0.001),并且 OMT 组的倾向评分调整后的危险比为 3.862(P<0.001)。心脏相关事件的生存率方面,接受 OPCAB 治疗的患者生存率高于接受 OMT 治疗的患者(Log Rank=0.002),并且 OMT 组的倾向评分调整后的危险比为 3.663(P=0.010)。两组在 MACE 无事件生存率方面无统计学差异(Log Rank=0.273)。
对于不适合体外循环完全血运重建手术或经皮介入治疗的多支 CAD 高危患者,与单独 OMT 相比,采用 OPCAB LIMA-on-LAD 进行不完全血运重建可提高生存率。