Five-year outcomes of off and on-pump CABG: Insights from PROMOTE Patency Trial.

BACKGROUND: There are limited studies reporting follow-up outcome data comparing of off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) with on-pump (ONCAB) technique. The aim of the study was to report the 5-year clinical outcomes of OPCAB and ONCAB in a post hoc analysis of the PROMOTE patency trial. METHODS: From March 2016 through March 2017, a total of 321 patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) were randomised to either the off-pump or the on-pump technique. Data on all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), repeat revascularisation and need for renal replacement therapy (RRT) were recorded. The composite and each of these individual outcomes are reported at 5-year interval. RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 65.9 months (±3.39). A total of 275 (85.93%) patients followed up at the 5-year interval who underwent CABG by the off-pump (n = 158) and the on-pump (n = 162) technique. The all-cause mortality was 8.9% and 5.7% in ONCAB and OPCAB, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-1.57, p = 0.31). The composite of all-cause mortality, non-fatal MI, non-fatal CVA, RRT and need for repeat revascularisation was comparable in both groups (7.1% vs. 11.9%, HR = 0.57; 95% CI 0.25-1.31, p = 0.18 in OPCAB and ONCAB, respectively). The rates of 5-year non-fatal MI (p = 0.2), non-fatal CVA (p = 0.36) and need for repeat revascularisation (p = 1) were similar in both groups. A sub-group analysis did not show any significant interaction or effect modification with either of the techniques. CONCLUSIONS: The 5-year clinical outcomes of OPCAB are comparable to ONCAB in low-risk patients undergoing CABG. Off-pump coronary artery bypass had no additional benefit in any subgroup.

Current practice of saphenous vein graft harvesting in coronary artery bypass graft surgery: an Indian survey.

Purpose: The treatment of occluded saphenous vein graft (SVG) is challenging, and thus preventing the graft occlusion is of utmost importance. However, despite its recognized importance, a paucity of data exists regarding how SVGs are handled and preserved. Hence, this survey was conducted to document the techniques of vein graft preservation and handling among cardiac surgeons in India. Methods: The survey had 26 questions regarding vein graft usage, harvesting, handling, and preservation techniques. Three hundred cardiac surgeons across India participated in this survey between March 2019 and July 2019. Results: Responses were received from 215 (71.6%) surgeons across 13 states. Around 87% of respondents reported that ≥ 76% of veins were harvested by the open technique. Among the respondents, around 67% used one SVG in ≥ 96% of their patients, 45% used two SVGs in ≥ 86% of their patients, and 38% used ≥ 3 SVGs in < 25% of their patients, respectively. Around 54%, 27%, 9%, and 9% of respondents used autologous whole blood, saline solution, pH-buffered solution, and other solutions, respectively. In addition, 96.74% of respondents heparinized their vein graft preservation solutions, and 98.14% preserved the solution at room temperature. 34.88% and 83.26% of respondents used dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) before and after surgery in ≥ 76% of their patients, respectively. 63.26% of the surgeons reported that the patients received DAPT for > 12 months. Conclusion: There is a significant variance in the process of vein harvesting, preservation, handling, and antiplatelet therapy protocols among various cardiac surgeons across India. Therefore, there is a need for standardization in the practice of vein harvesting.

Graft patency at 3 months after off- and on-pump coronary bypass surgery: a randomized trial.

PURPOSE: Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is performed either with the aid of cardiopulmonary bypass (on-pump) or without cardiopulmonary bypass (off-pump). There is a scarcity of angiographic data to support the non-inferiority of off-pump technique to on-pump technique. The objective of this study is to ascertain the non-inferiority of off-pump CABG when compared to on-pump CABG in terms of angiographically assessed graft patency at 3 months. METHODS: A total of 320 patients with multivessel coronary artery disease were enrolled in a multicenter prospective randomized trial either to on-pump CABG (n = 162) or off-pump CABG (n = 158) between March 2016 through March 2017. Graft patency was evaluated by using either multidetector computerized tomographic angiography or conventional coronary angiography at 3 months. The major adverse cardiac and cardiovascular events (MACCE) were also analyzed at 3 months. RESULTS: The median number of grafts per patient in off-pump was 3.00 (Q1:3.00 and Q3:4.00) vs on-pump 4.00 (Q1:3.00 to Q3:4.00), and the mean number of grafts per patient was lower in the off-pump CABG at 3.45 ± 0.75 vs 3.64 ± 0.70 in the on-pump CABG (p = 0.01). There was no significant difference in mortality at 3 months between the off-pump (0.63%) and on-pump groups (1.85%) with p value of 0.62. The cumulative combined MACCE showed significant difference between off-pump group (0.63%) and on-pump group (5.55%), p = 0.01. Follow-up angiograms were done in 239 (75%) patients with 120 off-pump and 119 in the on-pump group. The analysis was also done regarding graft patency in a graded manner-when analysis of A (excellent) grafts vs B (stenosed) grafts and O (occluded) grafts were made, there was no statistically significant difference in overall graft patency at 3 months between on-pump [376 /429 grafts (87.6%)] and off-pump [366 /420 grafts (87.1%)] groups (p = 0.82). The patency rates were similar among bypass conduits (left internal thoracic artery (ITA) in off-pump (91.4%) vs on-pump (92.9%) p = 0.66, right ITA in off-pump (82.1%) vs on-pump (81.8%) p = 0.97, radial artery in off-pump (84.4%) vs on-pump (82.6%) p = 0.81; saphenous vein in off-pump (85.8%) vs on-pump (86.3%), p = 0.86 and among 3 coronary territories. CONCLUSIONS: Off-pump CABG is non-inferior to on-pump CABG in terms of overall graft patency at 3 months and was associated with a fewer combined cumulative MACCE compared to on-pump CABG.

One-year outcomes of off- and on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: PROMOTE patency trial.

PURPOSE: Earlier we reported 3-month graft patency and clinical outcomes of prospective randomized comparison of off-pump and on-pump multivessel coronary artery bypass surgery to evaluate outcomes and graft patency (PROMOTE patency) trial. We now report major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at 1 year of patients who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) using either off-pump technique or on-pump technique. METHODS: The PROMOTE patency trial is a two-arm, prospective, randomized, multicentre trial, and enrolled 320 patients with multivessel coronary artery disease from March 2016 through March 2017 at 6 centres and were randomly assigned to undergo either off-pump CABG (OPCAB) (n = 158 patients) or on-pump CABG (n = 162 patients). The outcomes at 1 year were assessed. RESULTS: One mortality (0.64%) occurred in off-pump group (at 30 days) and 4 (2.48%) in on-pump group (1 at 30 days, 2 at 3 months, and 1 at 1 year) (p = 0.37). There was no difference between off-pump and on-pump groups in the outcomes of nonfatal myocardial infarction (1 in off-pump and 2 in on-pump group, p = 1.00) and cerebrovascular accident (none in off-pump and 2 in on-pump group, p = 0.49). Repeat revascularization was done in one patient in each group (p = 1.00). CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in the incidence of MACCE between off-pump and on-pump CABG group at 1 year.

Bilateral internal thoracic artery grafting in India-Time to raise the bar.

OBJECTIVES: Bilateral internal thoracic artery (BITA) grafting strategy is the current trend in coronary artery bypass grafting for multivessel coronary artery disease. Although better long-term outcomes have been shown, BITA grafting is underutilized as a main strategy for revascularization by most of the surgeons. The survey was conducted to ascertain the current usage and concerns of BITA grafting in India. METHODS: Database of 856 Indian cardiac surgeons currently with predominantly adult practice was prepared and a questionnaire was sent about use of single and bilateral ITA grafts and BITA grafting strategy in different clinical scenarios. RESULTS: A total of 112 surgeons (13.08%) from 75 institutions responded and 92 surgeons (10.7%) completed the survey. Single ITA is used by 79% of surgeons in more than 90% of their patients. 31% and 29% of surgeons use BITA grafting in 5-10% and 11-98% of their patients respectively. 53% of surgeons avoided the usage of BITA grafting in patients with smoking, 35% of surgeons in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 58% of surgeons in obesity and 62% of surgeons in acute coronary syndrome, 36% of surgeons in patients with left ventricular dysfunction and 61% of surgeons in patients with poor coronary anatomy. The concerns for BITA usage are risk of deep sternal wound infection (DSWI) (40%), increased operative time (27%), unknown superiority (12%) and limited length of right ITA (5%). CONCLUSIONS: The usage of BITA grafting is restricted to 10% in India and main concerns are DSWI and increased operative time.