Key result
Off-pump CABG linked to ~11% higher 10-year mortality compared with on-pump CABG.
Why the study?
Does off-pump CABG improve long-term survival and morbidity compared to on-pump CABG in patients undergoing surgical revascularization?
Cohort (n=22,245)
Yes
Does off-pump CABG improve long-term survival and morbidity compared to on-pump CABG in patients undergoing surgical revascularization?
Off-pump CABG performed by experienced surgeons is associated with higher 10-year mortality, incomplete revascularization, and repeat revascularization rates compared to on-pump CABG.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Observational associations favor on-pump CABG; leaves open whether randomized trials would confirm before changing practice.
BACKGROUND Long-term benefits of off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are controversial. OBJECTIVES The authors sought to compare long-term survival and morbidity after on-pump versus off-pump CABG. METHODS Mandatory clinical and administrative registries from New Jersey Department of Health were linked to identify patients who underwent CABG between 2005 and 2011, by surgeons who had performed at least 100 off-pump or on-pump CABG operations. Survival, stroke, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and new dialysis requirement were compared using Cox modeling, propensity scores, and instrumental variable analysis. Median follow-up was 6.8 years (range: 0 to 11.0 years); last follow-up date was December 31, 2015. RESULTS Among 42,570 CABG patients, 6,950 who underwent off-pump CABG and 15,295 who underwent on-pump CABG met study criteria. Off-pump CABG was associated with higher mortality (33.4% vs. 29.6% at 10 years; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04 to 1.18; p = 0.002) compared with on-pump CABG. Off-pump CABG was associated with a higher risk of incomplete revascularization (15.7% vs. 8.8%; p < 0.001), which was a predictor of late mortality (HR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.03 to 1.17; p = 0.006); and higher rates of repeat revascularization (15.4% vs. 14.0% at 10 years; HR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.37; p = 0.048). There were no significant differences in the rate of stroke, myocardial infarction, or new dialysis. CONCLUSIONS In this mandatory clinical registry, off-pump was associated with increased incomplete revascularization, repeat revascularization, and mortality at 10 years compared with on-pump CABG, suggesting that on-pump CABG may be the appropriate choice for most patients undergoing surgical revascularization.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chikwe et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease requiring CABG (n=22,245). Off-pump CABG vs. On-pump CABG was evaluated on Mortality at 10 years (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.18, p=0.002). Off-pump CABG was associated with higher 10-year mortality compared with on-pump CABG.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: