Article,
On-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery: what is the status after ROOBY, DOORS, CORONARY and GOPCABE?
Contributors
Houlind, Kim Christian
0000-0002-1600-4415
[1]
[2]
Affiliations
- [1] Kolding Hospital [NORA names: Region of Southern Denmark; Hospital; Denmark; Europe, EU; Nordic; OECD];
- [2] University of Southern Denmark [NORA names: SDU University of Southern Denmark; University; Denmark; Europe, EU; Nordic; OECD]
Abstract
Off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery has been purported to be safer than conventional coronary artery bypass surgery performed using cardiopulmonary bypass. This theory was supported by a number of early series, but failed to be confirmed by a number of small, randomized, controlled trials. Conversely, it has been suggested that revascularization after off-pump surgery is associated with fewer grafts and lower graft patency, potentially leading to a higher risk of cardiovascular morbidity and need for repeated coronary interventions. Since 2009, four major randomized controlled trials have been published, increasing the level of evidence significantly.
Keywords
Coronary,
artery bypass surgery,
bypass,
bypass surgery,
cardiopulmonary bypass,
cardiovascular morbidity,
controlled trials,
conventional coronary artery bypass surgery,
coronary artery bypass surgery,
coronary intervention,
doors,
early series,
evidence,
graft,
graft patency,
high risk,
high risk of cardiovascular morbidity,
intervention,
level of evidence,
levels,
morbidity,
off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery,
off-pump surgery,
on-pump,
patency,
randomized controlled trials,
revascularization,
risk of cardiovascular morbidity,
series,
status,
surgery,
theory,
trials
