RESUMO
Although it is possible to find a number of comparative studies in the world literature discussing the results of coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) with and without cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), until now such analysis has not been made in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The main aim of this scientific work was to compare morbidity and mortality, need for blood transfusions, length of stay in the intensive care unit, total length of hospitalisation and number of complication in two groups of patients operated with these methods. Patients with EuroScore > or =5 with CABG operated in Cardiovascular Clinic Tuzla, from May 2000 to May 2005 divided in two groups, were included in this study. There were 100 patients in the first group operated with CPB and 100 patients in the second group operated without CPB. The average time spent on respirators was shorter in patients operated without CPB (3.7 vs.9.74 hours, p = 0.023) and the time spent in Intensive care shorter too (19 vs. 23 days, p = 0.008). Volume of postoperative bleeding was less in patients operated without CPB (574.9 vs. 988.9 ml, p = 0.038), as volume after blood transfusion (168.8 vs. 350.3 mi, p = 0.001). Intraoperative inotrope support was less in patients operated without CPB (8.0 vs. 19.0%, p = 0.038) as postoperative inotrope support (6.0 vs. 17.0%, p = 0.027). The most usual postoperative complication was atrial fibrillation and there was no difference between patients operated with CPB and without CPB (24% vs. 17%, p = 0.293). Mortality was not different in patients operated with or without CPB (2.0% vs. 6.0%, p = 0.140). The average time of total hospitalisation was also shorter in patients operated without CPB (8.0 vs. 9.5 days, p = 0.039. In conclusion CABG without CPB has many advantages compared to the conventional method. Mortality and morbidity are reduced and there is less need for transfusion. The time spent on mechanical ventilation is reduced and less time is spent in intensive care. The total hospitalisation time is also reduced.
