Background and aim of the study: Emergency re-revascularization and invasive/noninvasive interventions in intensive care unit (ICU) are two main treatment methods in cardiac arrest following coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We evaluated the short- and long-term consequences of these two methods and discussed the indications for re-revascularization.
Methods: Between 1998 and 2004, a total of 148 CABG patients, who were complicated with cardiac arrest, were treated with emergency re-revascularization (n = 36, group R) and ICU procedures (n = 112, group ICU). Re-revascularizations are mostly blind operations depending on clinical/hemodynamic criteria. These are: no response to resuscitation, recurrent tachycardia/fibrillation, and severe hemodynamic instability after resuscitation. Re-angiography could only be performed in 3.3% of the patients. Event-free survival of the groups was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Events are: death, recurrent angina, myocardial infarction, functional capacity, and reintervention.
Results: Seventy percent of patients, who were complicated with cardiac arrest, had perioperative myocardial infarction (PMI). This rate was significantly higher in group R (p = 0.013). The major finding in group R was graft occlusion (91.6%). During in-hospital period, no difference was observed in mortality rates between the two groups. However, hemodynamic stabilization time (p = 0.012), duration of hospitalization (p = 0.00006), and mechanical support use (p = 0.003) significantly decreased by re-revascularization. During the mean 37.1 +/- 25.1 months of follow-up period, long-term mortality (p = 0.03) and event-free survival (p = 0.029) rates were significantly in favor of group R.
Conclusion: Better short- and long-term results were observed in the re-revascularization group.