沈刘忠
中国医学科学院阜外医院 心血管外科
OBJECTIVES:The present study sought to compare postoperative bleeding and renal function in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing simultaneous hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) and minimally invasive direct off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (MIDCABG).METHODS:The study retrospectively collected the data of 594 consecutive patients who underwent simultaneous HCR and 351 patients who underwent MIDCABG with planned staged HCR (MIDCABG first, then elective percutaneous coronary intervention) in Fuwai Hospital from June 2007 to December 2020. A total of 317 pairs of patients who were matched in a 1:1 ratio with propensity score matching were enrolled in this study. Bleeding and changes in renal function were compared between the 2 groups.RESULTS:Compared with patients who underwent MIDCABG, patients who underwent simultaneous HCR had significantly greater chest tube drainage on the day of the operation (492.7 ± 282.4 mL vs 441.0 ± 261.9 mL; P = .023), but no significant difference was detected in the total amount during the postoperative period (788.8 ± 458.9 mL vs 753.3 ± 409.8 mL; P = .74). The differences in re-exploration for bleeding (0.3% vs 1.6%; P = .13), blood transfusion (18.9% vs 16.4%; P = .13), acute kidney injury (23.3% vs 18.6%; P = .53), and in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (including all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeated revascularization) (2.5% vs 1.9%; P = .67) between the 2 groups did not reach statistical significance.CONCLUSIONS:Compared with MIDCABG, simultaneous HCR (MIDCABG first, instant percutaneous coronary intervention) did not increase postoperative bleeding or the incidence of acute kidney injury.
The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery 2023
BACKGROUND:Although evidence is sufficient to confirm that hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) is safe and effective in the short term, its value in the long run is debatable.OBJECTIVES:This study sought to compare the long-term outcomes of HCR with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for multivessel disease.METHODS:Three groups of patients, 540 each, receiving HCR, CABG, or PCI between June 2007 to September 2018, were matched using propensity score matching. Patients were stratified by EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) II (low ≤0.9; 0.9 < medium <1.5; high ≥1.5) and SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score (low ≤22; 22 < medium <33; high ≥33). Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) scores were compared among the 3 groups.RESULTS:In terms of MACCE and SAQ, HCR performed similarly to off-pump CABG but significantly outperformed PCI (P < 0.001). In the low-to-medium EuroSCORE II and medium-to-high SYNTAX score tertiles, MACCE rates in the HCR group were significantly lower than those in the PCI (EuroSCORE II: low, 30.7% vs 41.2%; P = 0.006; medium, 31.3% vs 41.7%; P = 0.013; SYNTAX score: medium, 27.6% vs 41.2%; P = 0.018; high, 32.4% vs 52.7%; P = 0.011) but were similar to those in the CABG group. In the high EuroSCORE II stratum, HCR had a lower MACCE rate than CABG (31.9% vs 47.0%; P = 0.041) and PCI (31.9% vs 53.7%; P = 0.015).CONCLUSIONS:Compared with conventional strategies, HCR provided satisfactory long-term outcomes in MACCE and functional status for multivessel disease.
JACC. Cardiovascular interventions 2023
OBJECTIVES:To compare in-hospital and midterm outcomes after one-stop hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) and off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM).METHODS:The series included 120 patients with DM who underwent one-stop HCR at Fuwai Hospital between June 2007 and September 2014. These patients were 1:2 matched with 240 patients who underwent OPCAB using propensity score matching. The primary endpoint was a major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (MACCE) over midterm follow-up, and secondary endpoints were in-hospital outcomes. Accounting for matched-pairs design, the survival analysis was evaluated with a marginal Cox model, and the continuous and dichotomous variables of in-hospital outcomes were compared with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and a logistic regression model using generalized estimating equations, respectively.RESULTS:Compared with OPCAB, one-stop HCR was associated with less chest tube drainage (median, 748 mL [interquartile range (IQR), 540-1080 mL] vs 990 mL [IQR, 730-1250 mL]; P < .001), a lower packed red blood cell transfusion rate (18.3% vs 29.6%; P = .032), shorter mechanical ventilation time (median, 13.7 hours [IQR, 10.3-16.9 hours] vs 16.8 hours [IQR, 13.0-19.6 hours]; P < .001), and shorter stay in intensive care unit (median 21.7 hours [IQR, 19.0-44.3 hours] vs 46.7 hours [IQR, 24.3-72.7 hours]; P < .001). Over 30 months of follow-up, one-stop HCR and OPCAB had a similar rate of MACCE (7.4% vs 8.0% at 3 years; hazard ratio, 0.807; 95% confidence limit, 0.352-1.849; P = .612), but one-stop HCR had a lower stroke rate (0% vs 3.6% at 3 years; P = .046).CONCLUSIONS:For selected patients with DM, one-stop HCR provided safe and reproducible revascularization, with less perioperative invasiveness and similar and favorable midterm outcomes compared with OPCAB.
The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery 2016
OBJECTIVES:This study sought to compare midterm clinical outcomes of 1-stop hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease.BACKGROUND:One-stop HCR has emerged to be a feasible and attractive alternative to CABG and PCI in selected patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.METHODS:From June 2007 to December 2010, 141 consecutive patients underwent 1-stop HCR at Fuwai Hospital. Using propensity score methodology, these patients were matched with 2 separate groups of 141 patients who underwent isolated CABG or PCI during the same period. All patients were stratified by the EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation Score) and the SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score. Cutoffs for EuroSCORE (low, ≤2; medium, >2 and <6; high, ≥6) and SYNTAX score (low, ≤24; medium, >24 and <30; high, ≥30) were identified by tertiles. Three groups' cumulative major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE) rates in each risk tertile were compared.RESULTS:One-stop HCR incurred MACCE rate lower than that with PCI (p < 0.001), but similar to that with CABG (p = 0.140). After stratification by EuroSCORE or SYNTAX score, the cumulative MACCE rates were similar among the 3 groups in low and medium tertiles. But in the high EuroSCORE tertile, patients who underwent 1-stop HCR had a lower MACCE rate than did the groups that underwent CABG (p = 0.030) and PCI (p = 0.006). Meanwhile, patients with a high SYNTAX score who underwent 1-stop HCR had a MACCE rate lower than did those who underwent PCI (p = 0.002), but similar to that of those who underwent CABG (p = 0.362).CONCLUSIONS:One-stop HCR provides favorable midterm outcomes for selected patients with multivessel coronary artery disease in each risk tertile. For patients with high EuroSCORE or SYNTAX score, it might provide a promising alternative to CABG and PCI.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2013
