Introduction and objectives: Myocardial revascularization without cardiopulmonary bypass has been shown to reduce operative morbi-mortality. We report our recent experience with this novel technique in order to evaluate its theoretical advantages in comparison with conventional surgery.
Patients and methods: This retrospective analysis included 547 consecutive patients undergoing isolated myocardial revascularization from December 1997 through November 2000. One hundred twenty-one off-pump patients were compared to 426 undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass. Logistic regression analysis was performed to find predictors of mortality, transfusion, postoperative atrial fibrillation and length of hospital stay.
Results: Off-pump patients were at greater risk: they were older, with a lower ejection fraction and a higher prevalence of unstable angina, heart failure and associated comorbidity. Off-pump surgery reduced transfusions (1 1 vs 1,9 2 blood units; p < 0.0001) and postoperative hospital stays (8.9 5 vs 11,3 7 days; p < 0.001). The off-pump group showed a trend toward reduced morbidity but the technique did not decrease hospital mortality. Cardiopulmonary bypass was an independent predictor of blood transfusion and longer hospital stay. Short-term follow-up revealed no significant differences in recurring angina or patency rates.
Conclusions: Off-pump coronary bypass surgery is a good option in high-risk patients because it reduces the incidence of perioperative transfusion and the length of hospitalization. Furthermore, it showed a trend toward reduced morbidity. Mortality was not significantly higher in spite of the higher risk of the patients. Long-term longitudinal follow-up is mandatory to assess the true effectiveness of this technique.