期刊
CIRCULATION
卷 125, 期 23, 页码 2827-2835出版社
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.069260
关键词
coronary artery bypass; coronary artery bypass; off-pump
资金
- VA Office of Research and Development
- VA Central Office, Office of Patient Care Services
- Office of Research and Development at the Eastern Colorado Health Care System
- Office of Denver VA Medical Center
- Office of Northport VA Medical Center
Background-The Department of Veterans Affairs Randomized On/Off Bypass (ROOBY) trial compared clinical and angiographic outcomes in off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery to ascertain the relative efficacy of the 2 techniques. Methods and Results-From February 2002 to May 2007, the ROOBY trial randomized 2203 patients to off-pump versus on-pump CABG. Follow-up angiography was obtained in 685 off-pump (62%) and 685 on-pump (62%) patients. Angiograms were analyzed (blinded to treatment) for FitzGibbon classification (A=widely patent, B=flow limited, O=occluded) and effective revascularization. Effective revascularization was defined as follows: All 3 major coronary territories with significant disease were revascularized by a FitzGibbon A-quality graft to the major diseased artery, and there were no new postanastomotic lesions. Off-pump CABG resulted in lower FitzGibbon A patency rates than on-pump CABG for arterial conduits (85.8% versus 91.4%; P=0.003) and saphenous vein grafts (72.7% versus 80.4%; P<0.001). Fewer off-pump patients were effectively revascularized (50.1% versus 63.9% on-pump; P<0.001). Within each major coronary territory, effective revascularization was worse off pump than on pump (all P<0.001). The 1-year adverse cardiac event rate was 16.4% in patients with ineffective revascularization versus 5.9% in patients with effective revascularization (P<0.001). Conclusions-Off-pump CABG resulted in significantly lower FitzGibbon A patency for arterial and saphenous vein graft conduits and less effective revascularization than on-pump CABG. At 1 year, patients with less effective revascularization had higher adverse event rates.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据