Search

Objectives The authors sought to investigate long-term outcomes after revascularization with and without use of cardiopulmonary bypass and hypothesized that off-pump would be comparable with on-pump. The primary outcome of interest was survival, and secondary outcomes were need for reintervention for revascularization or new diagnosis of myocardial infarction occurring any time after surgery during the 8- to 12-year follow-up period. Design Retrospective cohort analysis. Setting Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Participants All patients undergoing primary isolated coronary bypass between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2008 (n = 555). Interventions Coronary artery bypass on-pump (n = 238) or off-pump (n = 317). Measurements and Main Results Demographic and clinical variables were documented, including information on mortality, new myocardial infarction, and need for reintervention in the 8- to 12-year period after surgery. The on-pump and off-pump groups were similar regarding all demographic and clinical variables (p > 0.05), except for higher incidence of prior percutaneous coronary intervention in the off-pump group. There were more perioperative complications in the on-pump group (p = 0.007) and a greater number of grafts used (p = 0.000). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated no significant difference (p > 0.05) in overall survival, reintervention-free survival, or postoperative myocardial infarction–free survival between patients who underwent bypass grafting on-pump or off-pump over extended follow-up averaging 10years. Conclusions The present study's data did not show differences in key long-term outcomes between patients who underwent revascularization with or without cardiopulmonary bypass, supporting the idea that both methods achieve similar late results regarding overall survival, need for reintervention, and postoperative myocardial infarction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]