Cargando…
Graft flow evaluation with intraoperative transit-time flow measurement in off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare transit-time flow measurement (TTFM) parameters for on-pump (ONCAB) and off-pump (OPCAB) coronary artery bypass procedures. METHODS: The database of the Registry for Quality AssESsmenT with Ultrasound Imaging and TTFM in Cardiac Bypass Surgery (REQUEST) study was retro...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9579515/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36276694 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.xjtc.2022.05.002 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare transit-time flow measurement (TTFM) parameters for on-pump (ONCAB) and off-pump (OPCAB) coronary artery bypass procedures. METHODS: The database of the Registry for Quality AssESsmenT with Ultrasound Imaging and TTFM in Cardiac Bypass Surgery (REQUEST) study was retrospectively reviewed. Only single grafts were included (ie, no sequential or Y/T grafts). Primary end points were mean graft flow (MGF), pulsatility index (PI), diastolic fraction (DF), and backflow (BF). Unadjusted and propensity score-matching comparisons were performed. RESULTS: Of 1016 patients in the REQUEST registry, 846 had at least 1 graft for which TTFM was performed. Of these, 512 patients (60.6%) underwent ONCAB and 334 (39.4%) OPCAB procedures. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) during measurements was higher in the OPCAB group. After propensity score-matching, 312 well balanced pairs were left. In these matched patients, MGF was higher for the ONCAB versus the OPCAB group (32 vs 28 mL/min, respectively, for all grafts [P < .001]; 30 vs 27 mL/min for arterial grafts [P = .002]; and 35 vs 31 mL/min for venous grafts [P = .006], respectively). PI was lower in the ONCAB group (2.1 vs 2.3, for all grafts; P < .001). Diastolic fraction was slightly lower in the ONCAB group (65% vs 67.5%; P < .001). The backflow was also lower in the ONCAB group (0.6 vs 1.3; P < .001) with trends similar to MGF and PI for venous and arterial grafts. There were 21 (3.3%) revisions in the OPCAB group and 14 (2.1%) in the ONCAB group (P = .198). CONCLUSIONS: ONCAB surgery was associated with higher MGF and lower PI values, especially in venous grafts. Different TTFM cutoff values for ONCAB versus OPCAB surgery might be considered. |
---|