Is 100% beating heart coronary by-pass justified?


Davit S., Senkaya I., Ercan A., Kan I., Ozkan H.

CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, vol.10, no.6, pp.579-585, 2002 (Journal Indexed in SCI) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 10 Issue: 6
  • Publication Date: 2002
  • Doi Number: 10.1016/s0967-2109(02)00068-6
  • Title of Journal : CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY
  • Page Numbers: pp.579-585

Abstract

Coronary by-pass on a beating heart may provide a safer form of surgical revascularization by avoiding the well-documented side effects of cardiopulmonary by-pass. In addition, off-pump bypass is suggested to be a good alternative to on-pump especially in high risk patients. This study reviews the feasibility of coronary by-pass on the beating heart in all patients referred to surgery. Two hundred and ninety-four patients operated on the beating heart were prospectively followed and compared to the control group of 100 consecutive patients operated with the conventional method. There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to risk factors, except the incidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and ejection fraction which were higher in the conventional group, whereas peripheral vascular disease was higher in the beating heart group. There was more distal anastomosis in the conventional group. Postoperative inotrope requirement, peak creatine phosphokinase-MB, ventilation time, blood loss in the first 24 h, transfusion needs, new atrial fibrillation and length of hospital stay were significantly lower in the beating heart operations. However, there were no significant differences between the groups in terms of neurological complications, chest infection, intraaortic balloon pump usage and mortality. In conclusion, multivessel off pump coronary by-pass is feasible with the same or better results as it is observed in the conventional technique when postoperative bleeding, neurogenic complications, arrythmias, hospital stay, overall morbidity and mortality are compared. (C) 2002 The International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.