Background: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare outcome in t
wo groups of patients who were classified according to their risk groups an
d underwent coronary revascularization with or without cardiopulmonary bypa
ss.
Material and Methods: Between January 1996 and July 2000, 480 cases that un
derwent coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) were included in a retrospect
ive nonrandomized manner for study. Group I included 210 patients who were
revascularized using off-pump techniques. Octopus 2 and 3 (Medtronic, Inc.,
Minneapolis, MN) were used for tissue stabilization. Group 2 included 270
cases who underwent CABG using CPB.
Emergency cases, combined operations, reoperations, and patients in cardiog
enic shock were excluded. Demographic variables were comparable between two
the groups. Using the Allegheny Clinic Risk Scoring Scale [Magovern 1996],
patients in both groups were scored as low, moderate, and high risk. In Gr
oup 1, 37% of patients consisted of high risk patients while Group 2 had 14
% (p < 0.05),
Student's t-test and chi-square test were used for statistical analysis and
alfa < 0.05 was considered significant.
Results: Mortality was 1.4% in Group 1 and 1.5% in Group 2 (p = ns). Mean a
nastomosis per patient was 2.6 +/- 0.6 in Group 1 and 3.2 +/- 0.5 in Group
2 (p < 0.05). Patients in Group I needed less blood transfusions and less i
notropic support postoperatively (p < 0.05). There were also fewer minor ne
urological events (p < 0.05) and pulmonary complications (Type 2) in Group
1. Atrial fibrillation rate, infection, and major neurological deficit (Typ
e 1) were similar in both groups.
Mortality was less among Group 1 high risk patients (3.9%) in comparison to
Group 2 high risk patients (7.9%), but this did not reach statistical sign
ificance.
Conclusions: In low or moderate risk patients, CABG can be performed safely
with or without CPB. In high risk patients with several comorbidities, off
-pump CABG seems to be a safe and efficient method that can improve outcome
.