Key result
Perioperative PAC during CABG shows no mortality benefit but is linked to higher hospitalization costs.
Why the study?
Does the use of a pulmonary artery catheter improve short- and long-term clinical outcomes or affect costs in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery?
Observational (n=1,361)
No
Does the use of a pulmonary artery catheter improve short- and long-term clinical outcomes or affect costs in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Routine use of pulmonary artery catheters during CABG surgery increases hospitalization costs and vasoactive drug use without providing significant short- or long-term clinical benefits.
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary artery catheters (PAC) are used widely to monitor hemodynamics in patients undergoing coronary bypass graft (CABG) surgery. However, recent studies have raised concerns regarding both the effectiveness and safety of PAC. Therefore, our aim was to determine the effects of the use of PAC on the short- and long-term health and economic outcomes of patients undergoing CABG. METHODS: 1361 Chinese patients who consecutively underwent isolated, primary CABG at the Cardiovascular Institute of Fuwai Hospital from June 1, 2012 to December 31, 2012 were included in this study. Of all the patients, 453 received PAC during operation (PAC group) and 908 received no PAC therapy (control group). Short-term and long-term mortality and major complications were analyzed with multivariate regression analysis and propensity score matched-pair analysis was used to yield two well-matched groups for further comparison. RESULTS: The patients who were managed with PAC more often received intraoperative vasoactive drugs dopamine (70.9% vs. 45.5%; P<0.001) and epinephrine (7.7% vs. 2.6%; P<0.001). In addition, costs for initial hospitalization were higher for PAC patients ($14,535 vs. $13,873, respectively, p = 0.004). PAC use was neither associated with the perioperative mortality or major complications, nor was it associated with long-term mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events. In addition, comparison between two well-matched groups showed no significant differences either in baseline characteristics or in short-term and long-term outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: There is no clear indication of any benefit or harm in managing CABG patients with PAC. However, use of PAC in CABG is more expensive. That is, PAC use increased costs without benefit and thus appears unjustified for routine use in CABG surgery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xu et al. (2015) conducted an observational in Isolated primary coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) (n=1,361). Pulmonary Artery Catheter (PAC) vs. No PAC therapy was evaluated on In-hospital mortality (OR 0.636, 95% CI 0.170-2.384, p=0.502). Perioperative use of a pulmonary artery catheter during CABG surgery was not associated with significant differences in in-hospital mortality (OR 0.636) or long-term mortality, but increased hospitalization costs.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: