Off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery surgery in octogenarians (from the KROK Registry)

9Citations
Citations of this article
11Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background According to the medical literature, both on-pump and off-pump coronary artery surgery is safe and effective in octogenarians. Objectives The aim of our study was to examine the epidemiology, in-hospital outcomes and long-term follow-up results in octogenarians undergoing off-pump and on-pump coronary artery surgery utilizing nationwide registry data. Methods All octogenarians (≥ 80 years) enrolled in the Polish National Registry of Cardiac Surgical Procedures (KROK Registry), who underwent isolated coronary surgery between January 2006 and September 2017 were identified. Preoperative data, perioperative complications, hospital mortality and long-term mortality were analyzed. Unadjusted and propensity-matched comparisons were performed between octogenarians undergoing off-pump and on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery. Results Octogenarians accounted for 4.1% of the total population undergoing coronary artery surgery in Poland during the analyzed period (n = 152,631) and this percentage is increasing. Among 6,006 analyzed patients, 2,744 (45.7%) were operated on-pump and 3,262 (54.3%) were operated off-pump. Propensity-matched analysis revealed that patients operated on-pump were more often reoperated due to postoperative bleeding and their in-hospital mortality was higher (6.6% vs 4.5%, p = 0.006 and 8.7% vs 5.8%, p = 0.001, respectively). Long-term all-cause mortality was lower among patients operated off-pump (p = 0.013). Conclusion On the basis of our findings we suggest that off pump technique should be considered as perfectly acceptable in octogenarians.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Knapik, P., Hirnle, G., Kowalczuk-Wieteska, A., Zembala, M. O., Pawlak, S., Hrapkowicz, T., … Zembala, M. (2020). Off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery surgery in octogenarians (from the KROK Registry). PLoS ONE, 15(9 September). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0238880

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free