Why the study?
Does off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery improve clinical outcomes compared to on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery in patients undergoing surgical revascularization?
Does off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery improve clinical outcomes compared to on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery in patients undergoing surgical revascularization?
Off-pump CABG does not demonstrate overall superiority over on-pump CABG, but may offer specific benefits such as reduced stroke risk with anaortic techniques and improved outcomes in high-risk elderly patients.
Does not support routine off-pump preference; leaves open targeted use in high-risk elderly patients pending definitive trials.
The off-pump literature is divided into three eras: the "early phase" with results favouring off-pump surgery supported with randomized control trials (RCTs) mainly from Bristol, UK; an "intermediate phase" dominated by the results of the ROOBY trial and finally a more "contemporary phase" whereby the off/on-pump argument is unsettled. Although the literature has failed to project an overall superiority of off-pump versus on-pump surgery, nevertheless, small randomized control trials and large meta-analysis studies are concluding that the incidence of a stroke is less than 1 % when an aortic off-pump techniques (especially the non-touch technique) are advocated in patients with diseased ascending aorta. Furthermore, off-pump combined with hybrid procedures may lead to a reduction of adverse outcome in the aged high-risk population with concomitant poor left ventricular function and co-morbidities.The current review attempts to bring an insight onto the last ten years knowledge on the on/off-pump debate, with an aim to draw some clear conclusions in order to allow practitioners to reflect on the subject.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Parissis et al. (2015) conducted a review in Coronary artery disease. Off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery vs. On-pump coronary artery bypass surgery was evaluated.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: