Dong Li, Kang Yi-Kun, An Xiang-Guang
Heart Center & Beijing Key Laboratory of Hypertension - Beijing Chaoyang Hospital - Capital Medical University, Beijng - China.
Arq Bras Cardiol. 2018 Mar 19;110(4):321-330. doi: 10.5935/abc.20180044. Print 2018 Apr.
Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) is one of the standard treatments for coronary artery disease (CAD) while hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) represents an evolving revascularization strategy. However, the difference in outcomes between them remains unclear.
We performed a meta-analysis to compare the short-term and mid-term outcomes of HCR versus OPCAB for the treatment of multivessel or left main CAD.
We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane databases to identify related studies and a routine meta-analysis was conducted.
Nine studies with 6121 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in short-term major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rate (RR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.30-1.03, p = 0.06) or mortality (RR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.17-1.48, p = 0.22). HCR required less ventilator time (SMD: -0.36, 95% CI: -0.55- -0.16, p < 0.001), ICU stay (SMD: -0.35, 95% CI: -0.58 - -0.13, p < 0.01), hospital stay (SMD: -0.29, 95% CI: -0.50- -0.07, p < 0.05) and blood transfusion rate (RR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.49-0.67, p < 0.001), but needed more operation time (SMD: 1.29, 95% CI: 0.54-2.05, p < 0.001) and hospitalization costs (SMD: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.45-1.66, p < 0.001). The HCR group had lower mid-term MACCE rate (RR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.26-0.92, p < 0.05) but higher rate in mid-term target vessel revascularization (TVR, RR: 2.20, 95% CI: 1.32-3.67, p < 0.01).
HCR had similar short-term mortality and morbidity comparing to OPCAB. HCR decreased the ventilator time, ICU stay, hospital stay, blood transfusion rate and increased operation time and hospitalization costs. HCR has a lower mid-term MACCE rate while OPCAB shows better in mid-term TVR.
非体外循环冠状动脉搭桥术(OPCAB)是冠状动脉疾病(CAD)的标准治疗方法之一,而杂交冠状动脉血运重建术(HCR)则是一种不断发展的血运重建策略。然而,它们之间的疗效差异仍不明确。
我们进行了一项荟萃分析,以比较HCR与OPCAB治疗多支血管或左主干CAD的短期和中期疗效。
我们检索了PubMed、EMBASE、科学网和Cochrane数据库以识别相关研究,并进行了常规荟萃分析。
分析纳入了9项研究,共6121例患者。短期主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE)发生率(RR:0.55,95%CI:0.30 - 1.03,p = 0.06)或死亡率(RR:0.51,95%CI:0.17 - 1.48,p = 0.22)无显著差异。HCR所需机械通气时间更少(SMD:-0.36,95%CI:-0.55 - -0.16,p < 0.001)、重症监护病房(ICU)停留时间更短(SMD:-0.35,95%CI:-0.58 - -0.13,p < 0.01)、住院时间更短(SMD:-0.29,95%CI:-0.50 - -0.07,p < 0.05)以及输血率更低(RR:0.57,95%CI:0.49 - 0.67,p < 0.001),但手术时间更长(SMD:1.29,95%CI:0.54 - 2.05,p < 0.001)且住院费用更高(SMD:1.06,95%CI:0.45 - 1.66,p < 0.001)。HCR组中期MACCE发生率更低(RR:0.49,95%CI:0.26 - 0.92,p < 0.05),但中期靶血管血运重建(TVR)率更高(RR:2.20,95%CI:1.32 - 3.67,p < 0.01)。
与OPCAB相比,HCR的短期死亡率和发病率相似。HCR减少了机械通气时间、ICU停留时间、住院时间和输血率,但增加了手术时间和住院费用。HCR的中期MACCE发生率较低,而OPCAB在中期TVR方面表现更好。