Key result
Patients undergoing beating heart bypass surgery with pure venous conduits had a significantly higher mean left ventricular ejection fraction at 3 months compared to those receiving mixed conduits (56.16% vs 51.96%, p=0.009).
Why the study?
Does the use of mixed conduits compared to pure venous conduits improve left ventricular ejection fraction at 3 months in patients undergoing off-pump CABG for triple vessel disease?
Observational (n=50)
No
Does the use of mixed conduits compared to pure venous conduits improve left ventricular ejection fraction at 3 months in patients undergoing off-pump CABG for triple vessel disease?
Absolute Event Rate: 56.16% vs 51.96%
p-value: p=0.009
In patients undergoing off-pump CABG, the use of pure venous conduits was associated with a significantly greater short-term improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction at 3 months compared to mixed arterial-venous conduits, with similar rates of postoperative complications.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Should not yet change conduit selection in off-pump CABG; leaves open randomized confirmation of LVEF effects.
Chaudhary et al. (2017) conducted an observational in Triple vessel coronary artery disease (n=50). Pure venous conduits vs. Mixed conduits (left internal mammary artery and venous conduits) was evaluated on Mean left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at 3 months (p=0.009). Patients undergoing beating heart bypass surgery with pure venous conduits had a significantly higher mean left ventricular ejection fraction at 3 months compared to those receiving mixed conduits (56.16% vs 51.96%, p=0.009).
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: