Cargando…
Off-pump versus on-pump complete coronary artery bypass grafting: Comparison of the effects on the renal damage in patients with renal dysfunction
BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare off-pump technique with on-pump technique on renal function in patients with nondialysis-dependent renal dysfunction who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting. METHODS: The 94 patients with renal dysfunction undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting were...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Health
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6393058/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30170456 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000012146 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare off-pump technique with on-pump technique on renal function in patients with nondialysis-dependent renal dysfunction who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting. METHODS: The 94 patients with renal dysfunction undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass grafting were retrospectively analyzed. No patient was receiving dialysis. Patients were randomly assigned to conventional revascularization with cardiopulmonary bypass and beating heart. Both groups were compared in terms of renal dysfunction parameters and dialysis requirement. The logistic regression models were constructed to identify risk factors associated with dialysis requirement. RESULTS: Renal dysfunction requiring dialysis developed in 9 patients in the on-pump group. The measures analysis of variance was performed on the data that showed worsening of renal function in the on-pump group compared with the off-pump group. Cardiopulmonary bypass is significant as independent predictor for the development of postoperative dialysis. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that off-pump coronary revascularization offers a superior renal protection and has a significantly lower risk for renal complications in patients with nondialysis-dependent renal dysfunction when compared with conventional coronary revascularization with cardiopulmonary bypass. |
---|