Asian cardiovascular & thoracic annals · 2023
Five-year outcomes of off and on-pump CABG: Insights from PROMOTE Patency Trial.
Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sajja Lokeswara Rao, Sarkar Kunal, Mannam Gopichand, Padmanabhan Chandrasekhar, Narayan Pradeep, Kamtam Devanish Nh, Balakrishna Nagalla, Kodali Venkata Krishna Kumar, Mulay Anvay, Peter Sanjeeth, Beri Prashanthi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There are limited studies reporting follow-up outcome data comparing of off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) with on-pump (ONCAB) technique. The aim of the study was to report the 5-year clinical outcomes of OPCAB and ONCAB in a post hoc analysis of the PROMOTE patency trial.
METHODS: From March 2016 through March 2017, a total of 321 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) were randomised to either the off-pump or the on-pump technique. Data on all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), repeat revascularisation and need for renal replacement therapy (RRT) were recorded. The composite and each of these individual outcomes are reported at 5-year interval.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 65.9 months (±3.39). A total of 275 (85.93%) patients followed up at the 5-year interval who underwent CABG by the off-pump (n = 158) and the on-pump (n = 162) technique. The all-cause mortality was 8.9% and 5.7% in ONCAB and OPCAB, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-1.57, p = 0.31). The composite of all-cause mortality, non-fatal MI, non-fatal CVA, RRT and need for repeat revascularisation was comparable in both groups (7.1% vs. 11.9%, HR = 0.57; 95% CI 0.25-1.31, p = 0.18 in OPCAB and ONCAB, respectively). The rates of 5-year non-fatal MI (p = 0.2), non-fatal CVA (p = 0.36) and need for repeat revascularisation (p = 1) were similar in both groups. A sub-group analysis did not show any significant interaction or effect modification with either of the techniques.
CONCLUSIONS: The 5-year clinical outcomes of OPCAB are comparable to ONCAB in low-risk patients undergoing CABG. Off-pump coronary artery bypass had no additional benefit in any subgroup.
METHODS: From March 2016 through March 2017, a total of 321 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) were randomised to either the off-pump or the on-pump technique. Data on all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), repeat revascularisation and need for renal replacement therapy (RRT) were recorded. The composite and each of these individual outcomes are reported at 5-year interval.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 65.9 months (±3.39). A total of 275 (85.93%) patients followed up at the 5-year interval who underwent CABG by the off-pump (n = 158) and the on-pump (n = 162) technique. The all-cause mortality was 8.9% and 5.7% in ONCAB and OPCAB, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-1.57, p = 0.31). The composite of all-cause mortality, non-fatal MI, non-fatal CVA, RRT and need for repeat revascularisation was comparable in both groups (7.1% vs. 11.9%, HR = 0.57; 95% CI 0.25-1.31, p = 0.18 in OPCAB and ONCAB, respectively). The rates of 5-year non-fatal MI (p = 0.2), non-fatal CVA (p = 0.36) and need for repeat revascularisation (p = 1) were similar in both groups. A sub-group analysis did not show any significant interaction or effect modification with either of the techniques.
CONCLUSIONS: The 5-year clinical outcomes of OPCAB are comparable to ONCAB in low-risk patients undergoing CABG. Off-pump coronary artery bypass had no additional benefit in any subgroup.