• Shahzad Shaefi, Aaron Mittel, Dan Loberman, and Harish Ramakrishna.
• Divisions of Cardiac Anesthesia and Critical Care, Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
• J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 2019 Jan 1; 33 (1): 232-244.

AbstractSurgical coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the standard of care for revascularization of left main or three-vessel coronary artery disease. The off-pump coronary artery bypass graft (OPCAB) procedure avoids the use of cardiopulmonary bypass. Theoretically, OPCAB may improve long-term outcomes by reducing the rates of perioperative myocardial injury, stroke, neurocognitive impairment, and cardiac-related mortality. Several high-quality clinical trials have been conducted since OPCAB became popular in the 1990s and have demonstrated no benefit of OPCAB over traditional CABG with respect to these outcomes despite favorable short-term reductions in transfusion requirements and other postoperative complications. Ultimately, OPCAB is associated with less effective myocardial revascularization and does not entirely prevent complications traditionally associated with cardiopulmonary bypass. This article reviews major high-quality trials of OPCAB versus traditional CABG with respect to both short- and long-term clinical outcomes.Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

16 keywords...

hide…