Home > Riviste > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery > Fascicoli precedenti > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2022 February;63(1) > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2022 February;63(1):60-8



Opzioni di pubblicazione
Per abbonarsi
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca


Publication history
Per citare questo articolo



The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2022 February;63(1):60-8

DOI: 10.23736/S0021-9509.21.12012-9


lingua: Inglese

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies comparing off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in the elderly

Rui J. MACHADO 1, Francisca A. SARAIVA 1, Jennifer MANCIO 1, 2, Patrícia SOUSA, Rui J. CERQUEIRA 3, António S. BARROS 1, André P. LOURENÇO 4, Adelino F. LEITE-MOREIRA 1, 3

1 Department of Surgery and Physiology and Cardiovascular Research, Development Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal; 2 Department of Intensive Care and Perioperative Medicine, Royal Brompton and Harefield & Guys and St. Thomas NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; 3 Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, São João University Hospital, Porto, Portugal; 4 Department of Anesthesiology, São João University Hospital, Porto, Portugal

INTRODUCTION: Comparison of short and mid-term outcomes between off-pump CABG (OPCAB) and on-pump CABG (ONCAB) in patients older than 65 throughout a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs).
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A literature search was conducted using 3 databases. RCTs reporting mortality outcomes of OPCAB versus ONCAB among the elderly were included. Data on myocardial infarction, stroke, re-revascularization, renal failure and composite endpoints after CABG were also collected. Random effects models were used to compute statistical combined measures and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Five RCTs encompassing 6221 patients were included (3105 OPCAB and 3116 ONCAB). There were no significant differences on mid-term mortality (pooled HR: 1.02, 95%CI: 0.89-1.17, P=0.80) and composite endpoint incidence (pooled HR: 0.98, 95%CI: 0.88-1.09, P=0.72) between OPCAB and ONCAB. At 30-day, there were no differences in mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke and renal complications. The need for early re-revascularization was significantly higher in OPCAB (pooled OR: 3.22, 95%CI: 1.28-8.09, P=0.01), with a higher percentage of incomplete revascularization being reported for OPCAB in trials included in this pooled result (34% in OPCAB vs. 29% in ONCAB, P<0.01).
CONCLUSIONS: Data from RCTs in elderly patients showed that OPCAB and ONCAB provide similar mid-term results. OPCAB was associated with a higher risk of early re-revascularization. As CABG on the elderly is still insufficiently explored, further RCTs, specifically designed targeting this population, are needed to establish a better CABG strategy for these patients.

KEY WORDS: Coronary artery bypass; Coronary artery bypass, off-pump; Aged

inizio pagina