Comparing on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: Numerous studies but few conclusions. A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on cardiovascular surgery and anesthesia in collaboration with the interdisciplinary working group on quality of care and outcomes research

Frank W. Sellke, J. Michael DiMaio, Louis R. Caplan, T. Bruce Ferguson, Timothy J. Gardner, Loren F. Hiratzka, Eric M. Isselbacher, Bruce W. Lytle, Michael J. Mack, John M. Murkin, Robert C. Robbins

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

221 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

One of the most hotly debated and polarizing issues in cardiac surgery has been whether coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) without the use of cardiopulmonary bypass or cardioplegia (off-pump CABG, or OPCAB) is superior to that performed with the heart-lung machine and the heart's being chemically arrested (standard CABG). Various clinical trials are reviewed comparing the 2 surgical strategies, including several large retrospective analyses, meta-analyses, and the randomized trials that address different aspects of standard CABG and OPCAB. Although definitive conclusions about the relative merits of standard CABG and OPCAB are difficult to reach from these varied randomized and nonrandomized studies, several generalizations may be possible. Patients may achieve an excellent outcome with either type of procedure, and individuals' outcomes likely depend more on factors other than whether they underwent standard CABG or OPCAB. Nevertheless, there appear to be trends in most studies. These trends include less blood loss and need for transfusion after OPCAB, less myocardial enzyme release after OPCAB up to 24 hours, less early neurocognitive dysfunction after OPCAB, and less renal insufficiency after OPCAB. Fewer grafts tend to be performed with OPCAB than with standard CABG. Length of hospital stay, mortality rate, and long-term neurological function and cardiac outcome appear to be similar in the 2 groups. To definitively answer the remaining questions of whether either strategy is superior and in which patients, a large-scale prospective randomized trial is required.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2858-2864
Number of pages7
JournalCirculation
Volume111
Issue number21
DOIs
StatePublished - May 31 2005

Fingerprint

Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass
Quality of Health Care
Coronary Artery Bypass
Anesthesia
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Length of Stay
Heart-Lung Machine
Induced Heart Arrest
Hospital Mortality
Cardiopulmonary Bypass
Thoracic Surgery
Renal Insufficiency
Meta-Analysis
Clinical Trials
Transplants
Mortality
Enzymes

Keywords

  • AHA Scientific Statements
  • Grafting
  • Morbidity
  • Mortality
  • Trials

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Comparing on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting : Numerous studies but few conclusions. A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on cardiovascular surgery and anesthesia in collaboration with the interdisciplinary working group on quality of care and outcomes research. / Sellke, Frank W.; DiMaio, J. Michael; Caplan, Louis R.; Ferguson, T. Bruce; Gardner, Timothy J.; Hiratzka, Loren F.; Isselbacher, Eric M.; Lytle, Bruce W.; Mack, Michael J.; Murkin, John M.; Robbins, Robert C.

In: Circulation, Vol. 111, No. 21, 31.05.2005, p. 2858-2864.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sellke, Frank W. ; DiMaio, J. Michael ; Caplan, Louis R. ; Ferguson, T. Bruce ; Gardner, Timothy J. ; Hiratzka, Loren F. ; Isselbacher, Eric M. ; Lytle, Bruce W. ; Mack, Michael J. ; Murkin, John M. ; Robbins, Robert C. / Comparing on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting : Numerous studies but few conclusions. A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on cardiovascular surgery and anesthesia in collaboration with the interdisciplinary working group on quality of care and outcomes research. In: Circulation. 2005 ; Vol. 111, No. 21. pp. 2858-2864.
@article{f34fbec549284c57b648ea5016ae1cdf,
title = "Comparing on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: Numerous studies but few conclusions. A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on cardiovascular surgery and anesthesia in collaboration with the interdisciplinary working group on quality of care and outcomes research",
abstract = "One of the most hotly debated and polarizing issues in cardiac surgery has been whether coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) without the use of cardiopulmonary bypass or cardioplegia (off-pump CABG, or OPCAB) is superior to that performed with the heart-lung machine and the heart's being chemically arrested (standard CABG). Various clinical trials are reviewed comparing the 2 surgical strategies, including several large retrospective analyses, meta-analyses, and the randomized trials that address different aspects of standard CABG and OPCAB. Although definitive conclusions about the relative merits of standard CABG and OPCAB are difficult to reach from these varied randomized and nonrandomized studies, several generalizations may be possible. Patients may achieve an excellent outcome with either type of procedure, and individuals' outcomes likely depend more on factors other than whether they underwent standard CABG or OPCAB. Nevertheless, there appear to be trends in most studies. These trends include less blood loss and need for transfusion after OPCAB, less myocardial enzyme release after OPCAB up to 24 hours, less early neurocognitive dysfunction after OPCAB, and less renal insufficiency after OPCAB. Fewer grafts tend to be performed with OPCAB than with standard CABG. Length of hospital stay, mortality rate, and long-term neurological function and cardiac outcome appear to be similar in the 2 groups. To definitively answer the remaining questions of whether either strategy is superior and in which patients, a large-scale prospective randomized trial is required.",
keywords = "AHA Scientific Statements, Grafting, Morbidity, Mortality, Trials",
author = "Sellke, {Frank W.} and DiMaio, {J. Michael} and Caplan, {Louis R.} and Ferguson, {T. Bruce} and Gardner, {Timothy J.} and Hiratzka, {Loren F.} and Isselbacher, {Eric M.} and Lytle, {Bruce W.} and Mack, {Michael J.} and Murkin, {John M.} and Robbins, {Robert C.}",
year = "2005",
month = "5",
day = "31",
doi = "10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.165030",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "111",
pages = "2858--2864",
journal = "Circulation",
issn = "0009-7322",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "21",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparing on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting

T2 - Numerous studies but few conclusions. A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on cardiovascular surgery and anesthesia in collaboration with the interdisciplinary working group on quality of care and outcomes research

AU - Sellke, Frank W.

AU - DiMaio, J. Michael

AU - Caplan, Louis R.

AU - Ferguson, T. Bruce

AU - Gardner, Timothy J.

AU - Hiratzka, Loren F.

AU - Isselbacher, Eric M.

AU - Lytle, Bruce W.

AU - Mack, Michael J.

AU - Murkin, John M.

AU - Robbins, Robert C.

PY - 2005/5/31

Y1 - 2005/5/31

N2 - One of the most hotly debated and polarizing issues in cardiac surgery has been whether coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) without the use of cardiopulmonary bypass or cardioplegia (off-pump CABG, or OPCAB) is superior to that performed with the heart-lung machine and the heart's being chemically arrested (standard CABG). Various clinical trials are reviewed comparing the 2 surgical strategies, including several large retrospective analyses, meta-analyses, and the randomized trials that address different aspects of standard CABG and OPCAB. Although definitive conclusions about the relative merits of standard CABG and OPCAB are difficult to reach from these varied randomized and nonrandomized studies, several generalizations may be possible. Patients may achieve an excellent outcome with either type of procedure, and individuals' outcomes likely depend more on factors other than whether they underwent standard CABG or OPCAB. Nevertheless, there appear to be trends in most studies. These trends include less blood loss and need for transfusion after OPCAB, less myocardial enzyme release after OPCAB up to 24 hours, less early neurocognitive dysfunction after OPCAB, and less renal insufficiency after OPCAB. Fewer grafts tend to be performed with OPCAB than with standard CABG. Length of hospital stay, mortality rate, and long-term neurological function and cardiac outcome appear to be similar in the 2 groups. To definitively answer the remaining questions of whether either strategy is superior and in which patients, a large-scale prospective randomized trial is required.

AB - One of the most hotly debated and polarizing issues in cardiac surgery has been whether coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) without the use of cardiopulmonary bypass or cardioplegia (off-pump CABG, or OPCAB) is superior to that performed with the heart-lung machine and the heart's being chemically arrested (standard CABG). Various clinical trials are reviewed comparing the 2 surgical strategies, including several large retrospective analyses, meta-analyses, and the randomized trials that address different aspects of standard CABG and OPCAB. Although definitive conclusions about the relative merits of standard CABG and OPCAB are difficult to reach from these varied randomized and nonrandomized studies, several generalizations may be possible. Patients may achieve an excellent outcome with either type of procedure, and individuals' outcomes likely depend more on factors other than whether they underwent standard CABG or OPCAB. Nevertheless, there appear to be trends in most studies. These trends include less blood loss and need for transfusion after OPCAB, less myocardial enzyme release after OPCAB up to 24 hours, less early neurocognitive dysfunction after OPCAB, and less renal insufficiency after OPCAB. Fewer grafts tend to be performed with OPCAB than with standard CABG. Length of hospital stay, mortality rate, and long-term neurological function and cardiac outcome appear to be similar in the 2 groups. To definitively answer the remaining questions of whether either strategy is superior and in which patients, a large-scale prospective randomized trial is required.

KW - AHA Scientific Statements

KW - Grafting

KW - Morbidity

KW - Mortality

KW - Trials

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=20344373427&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=20344373427&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.165030

DO - 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.165030

M3 - Article

C2 - 15927994

AN - SCOPUS:20344373427

VL - 111

SP - 2858

EP - 2864

JO - Circulation

JF - Circulation

SN - 0009-7322

IS - 21

ER -