			Home About us Contact

Off-pump CABG (off-pump + cabg)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	100%

Selected Abstracts

A Simple Atraumatic Clamp Technique Without a Stabilizer in Off-Pump CABG: How to Do It

JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, Issue 5 2005
Nezihi Kucukarslan M.D.
The technique exposes and immobilizes the coronary artery, allowing a precise anastomosis on the beating heart. In addition, it is simple, safe, and inexpensive. [source]

Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Versus Percutaneous Coronary Artery Intervention in Patients on Chronic Hemodialysis: Does a Drug-Eluting Stent Have an Impact on Clinical Outcome?

JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, Issue 3 2009
Susumu Manabe M.D.
For chronic hemodialysis (HD) patients, however, the impact of DES on clinical outcome is yet to be determined. Forty-six consecutive chronic HD patients who underwent myocardial revascularization in our institute were retrospectively reviewed. Twenty-eight patients underwent coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) and 18 patients underwent percutaneous coronary artery intervention (PCI). Patient characteristics were similar between the two groups. In the CABG group, bilateral internal thoracic artery (ITA) bypass grafting was performed in 27 patients and off-pump CABG was performed in 20 patients. In the PCI group, a DES was used in 12 patients. The number of coronary vessels treated per patient was higher in the CABG group (CABG: 4.25 ± 1.32 vs. PCI: 1.44 ± 0.78; p < 0.001). Two-year survival rates were similar between the two groups (CABG: 94.1% vs. PCI: 73.9%; p = 0.41), but major adverse cardiac event-free survival (CABG: 85.9% vs. PCI: 37.1%; p = 0.001) and angina-free survival (CABG: 84.9% vs. PCI: 28.9%; p < 0.001) rates were significantly higher in the CABG group. The one-year patency rate for the CABG grafts was 93.3% (left ITA: 100%, right ITA: 84.6%, sapenous vein: 90.9%, gastro-epiploic artery: 100%), and six-month restenosis rate for PCI was 57.1% (balloon angio-plasty: 75%, bare metal stent 40%, DES: 58.3%). Even in the era of DES, clinical results favored CABG. The difference in clinical results is due to the sustainability of successful revascularization. [source]

Beating-Heart Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting With Miniaturized Cardiopulmonary Bypass Results in a More Complete Revascularization When Compared to Off-Pump Grafting

ARTIFICIAL ORGANS, Issue 3 2010
Delawer Reber
Abstract The technique of miniaturized cardiopulmonary bypass (M-CPB) for beating-heart coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is relatively new and has potential advantages when compared to conventional cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). M-CPB consists of less tubing length and requires less priming volume. The system is phosphorylcholine coated and results in minimal pump-related inflammatory response and organ injury. Finally, this technique combines the advantages of the off-pump CABG (OPCAB) with the better exposure provided by CPB to facilitate complete revascularization. The hypothesis is that CABG with M-CPB has a better outcome in terms of complete coronary revascularization and perioperative results as that compared to off-pump CABG (OPCAB). In a retrospective study, 302 patients underwent beating-heart CABG, 117 (39%) of them with the use of M-CPB and 185 (61%) with OPCAB. After propensity score matching 62 patients in both groups were demographically similar. The most important intra- and early-postoperative parameters were analyzed. Endpoints were hospital mortality and complete revascularization. Hospital mortality was comparable between the groups. The revascularization was significantly more complete in M-CPB patients than in patients in the OPCAB group. Beating-heart CABG with M-CPB is a safe procedure and it provides an optimal operative exposure with significantly more complete coronary revascularization when compared to OPCAB. Beating-heart CABG with the support of a M-CPB is the operation of choice when total coronary revascularization is needed. [source]

Beneficial Effect of Preventative Intra-Aortic Balloon Pumping in High-Risk Patients Undergoing First-Time Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting,A Single Center Experience

ARTIFICIAL ORGANS, Issue 8 2009
Qingcheng Gong
Abstract Although intra-aortic balloon pumping (IABP) has been used widely as a routine cardiac assist device for perioperative support in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), the optimal timing for high-risk patients undergoing first-time CABG using IABP is unknown. The purpose of this investigation is to compare preoperative and preventative IABP insertion with intraoperative or postoperative obligatory IABP insertion in high-risk patients undergoing first-time CABG. We reviewed our IABP patients' database from 2002 to 2007; there were 311 CABG patients who received IABP treatment perioperatively. Of 311 cases, 41 high-risk patients who had first-time on-pump or off-pump CABG (presenting with three or more of the following criteria: left ventricular ejection fraction less than 0.45, unstable angina, CABG combined with aneurysmectomy, or left main stenosis greater than 70%) entered the study. We compared perioperatively the clinical results of 20 patients who underwent preoperative IABP placement (Group 1) with 21 patients who had obligatory IABP placement intraoperatively or postoperatively during CABG (Group 2). There were no differences in preoperative risk factors, except left ventricular aneurysm resection, between the two groups. There were no differences in indications for high-risk patients between the two groups. The mean number of grafts was similar. There were no significant differences in the need for inotropes, or in cerebrovascular, gastrointestinal, renal, and infective complications postoperatively. There were no IABP-related complications in either group. Major adverse cardiac event (severe hypotension and/or shock, myocardial infarction, and severe hemodynamic instability) was higher in Group 2 (14 [66.4%] vs. 1 [5%], P < 0.0001) during surgery. The time of IABP pumping in Group 1 was shorter than in Group 2 (72.5 ± 28.9 h vs. 97.5 ± 47.7 h, P < 0.05). The duration of ventilation and intensive care unit stay in Group 1 was significantly shorter than in Group 2, respectively (22.0 ± 1.6 h vs. 39.6 ± 2.1 h, P < 0.01 and 58.0 ± 1.5 h vs. 98.5 ± 1.9 h, P < 0.005). There were no differences in mortality between the two groups (n = 1 in Group 1 and n = 3 in Group 2). Preoperative and preventative insertion of IABP can be performed safely in selected high-risk patients undergoing CABG, with results comparable to those in patients who received obligatory IABP intraoperatively and postoperatively. Therefore, earlier IABP support as part of surgical strategy may help to improve the outcome in high-risk first-time CABG patients. [source]