High volume practice proved the safety of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery in left main coronary artery lesions: a two-year single center experience.

BACKGROUND: Left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis has been recognized as a risk factor for early death among patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). This study aimed to assess if LMCA lesions pose an additional risk of early or mid-term mortality and/or a major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG), compared with non-left main coronary artery stenosis (non-mainstem disease). METHODS: From January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2010, 4869 patients had a primary isolated OPCABG procedure at Beijing Anzhen Hospital. According to the pathology of LMCA lesions, they were retrospectively classified as a non-mainstem disease group (n = 3933) or a LMCA group (n = 936). Propensity scores were used to match the two groups, patients from the non-mainstem disease group (n = 831) were also randomly selected to match patients from the LMCA group (n = 831). Freedom from MACCE in the two groups was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: The difference in the mortality and the rate of MACCE during the first 30 days between the non-mainstem disease group and the LMCA group did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.429, P = 0.127 respectively). With a mean follow-up of (12.8 ± 7.5) months and a cumulative follow-up of 1769.6 patient-years, the difference in the freedom from MACCEs between the two groups, calculated through Kaplan-Meier method, did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.831). CONCLUSION: Analysis of a high volume of OPCABG procedures proved that LMCA lesions do not pose additional early and mid-term risk to OPCABG. Therefore, a LMCA lesion is as safe as non-mainstem disease lesion during the OPCABG procedure.

Ostial left main coronary artery stenosis as an additional risk factor in off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to determine whether general left main coronary artery stenosis (LMS) and ostial LMS pose additional risks after off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) relative to non-left main coronary artery stenosis. METHODS: From January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2009, 4366 patients underwent primary isolated off-pump CABG at Beijing Anzhen Hospital. Disease was retrospectively classified as non-left main disease (n = 3523), nonostial LMS (n = 765), and ostial LMS (n = 78). Groups were propensity score matched. Kaplan-Meier freedoms from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) were calculated. RESULTS: During the first 30 postoperative days, mortality was significantly higher in the ostial LMS group (6.41%) than in non-left main disease (0.855%, χ(2) = 7.78, P = .005) and nonostial LMS (1.28%, χ(2) = 4.71, P = .03) groups. Incidence of MACCEs was significantly higher in the ostial LMS group (20.5%) than in non-left main disease (5.98%, P = .000) and nonostial LMS (9.62%, P = .002) groups. Odds ratio for early MACCEs of ostial LMS versus non-left main disease was 3.74 (95% confidence interval, 1.72-8.17). At mean follow-up 12.8 ± 7.5 months and cumulative follow-up 498.5 patient-years, difference among groups in freedom from MACCEs did not reach statistical significance (χ(2) = 2.39, P = .303). CONCLUSIONS: Ostial LMS poses additional early risks of mortality and MACCEs in off-pump CABG. Off-pump CABG for ostial LMS should proceed with greater of intraoperative surveillance and lower threshold for converting to on-pump CABG.

Prognosis of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafts for ostial right coronary lesions in propensity-matched individuals.

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate the relative safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) versus coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG) for the treatment of ostial right coronary stenosis (ORCS) lesions. METHODS: Three hundred fifty-nine cases of ORCS lesion were treated via CABG (n = 232) or PCI (n = 127) procedures. Propensity scores for undergoing the CABG procedure were estimated and used to match 105 pairs of patients between the two groups. Kaplan-Meier major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE)-free curves were constructed to compare long-term MACCE-free survival between the two groups. RESULTS: For the 105 propensity-matched pairs, patients were more likely to undergo repeat revascularization with CABG in the PCI group than in the CABG group during the first 30 days (4 cases vs. 0 case, P= 0.043, χ(2) = 4.08) and the 1-year follow-up (5 cases vs. 0 case, P= 0.02, χ(2) = 5.17). With a mean follow-up of 12.04 ± 6.47 months and a total of 210.67 patient-years, the freedom from MACCE in the CABG group was significantly higher than that in the PCI group (Log rank test, χ(2) = 4.48, P= 0.03). There were no significant differences in the rates of death, myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, death/myocardium infarction/stroke, or repeated PCI between the two groups during the first 30 days and during the 1-year follow-up period. CONCLUSION: For OCRS lesions, CABG provided greater protection than PCI procedure in terms of freedom from MACCE, mainly due to the reduced number of repeated revascularization procedures. CABG should be considered as first-choice revascularization strategy for ORCS lesions.