Early clinical outcomes of on-pump beating-heart versus off-pump technique for surgical revascularization in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction: the experience of a single center.

作者信息

Xia LiMin, Ji Qiang, Song Kai, Shen JinQiang, Shi YunQing, Ma RunHua, Ding WenJun, Wang ChunSheng

机构信息

Shanghai Cardiovascular Disease Research Institute, 180 Fenglin Rd., Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China.

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery of Zhongshan Hospital Fudan University, 1609 XieTu Rd., Shanghai, 200032, People's Republic of China.

出版信息

J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017 Feb 23;12(1):11. doi: 10.1186/s13019-017-0572-x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Limited experiences of applying an on-pump beating-heart technique for surgical revascularization in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction have been reported. Which strategy, either off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or on-pump beating-heart CABG surgery, is the best strategy for surgical revascularization in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction is still controversial. This single-center study aimed to evaluate the impacts of an on-pump beating-heart versus an off-pump technique for surgical revascularization on the early clinical outcomes in patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 35% or less to explore which technique would be more suitable for surgical revascularization in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction.

METHODS

A total of 216 consecutive patients with an echocardiographic estimated LVEF of 35% or less who underwent non-emergency, primary, isolated CABG from January 2010 to December 2014 were included in this study and were divided into either an ONBEAT group (patients who received on-pump beating-heart CABG surgery, n = 88) or an OFF group (patients who received off-pump CABG surgery, n = 128). The early clinical outcomes were investigated and compared.

RESULTS

Patients in the ONBEAT group compared to the OFF group had a significant higher early postoperative LVEF (35.6 ± 2.9 vs. 34.8 ± 3.3%, p = 0.034) but shared a similar baseline LVEF (31.0 ± 2.8 vs. 31.0 ± 2.9%, p = 0.930). Patients in the ONBEAT group compared to the OFF group received a greater number of grafts and an increased amount of drainage during the first 24 h (3.7 ± 0.8 vs. 2.8 ± 0.6, p <0.001; 715 ± 187 ml vs. 520 ± 148 ml, p <0.001, respectively), without evidence of worse in-hospital mortality or major postoperative morbidity. Additionally, logistic regression analysis showed that surgical technique (on-pump beating-heart CABG vs. off-pump CABG) had no independent influence on in-hospital mortality or major postoperative morbidity in patients with preoperative LVEF of 35% or less.

CONCLUSIONS

The on-pump beating-heart technique may be an acceptable alternative to the off-pump technique for surgical revascularization in patients with an estimated LVEF of 35% or less.

摘要

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索