• Mizuho Imamaki, Atsushi Ishida, Hitoshi Shimura, Hiroki Kohno, Keiichi Ishida, Yuriko Niitsuma, and Masaru Miyazaki.
• Department of General Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba University Hospital, Chiba, Japan.
• Jpn. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2005 May 1;53(5):244-50.

ObjectiveThe purpose of this study is to compare the operative results of off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) and on-pump (conventional) coronary artery bypass (CCAB), to clarify qualitative problems and whether OPCAB is less invasive or not.MethodsOPCAB was consecutively performed in 63 patients and CCAB in 63 patients between July 1998 and December 2003.ResultsThe mean number of bypass grafts was 2.43 +/- 0.82 in the OPCAB group and 2.70 +/- 0.71 in the CCAB group (p = 0.096). In-hospital mortality was 0% in the OPCAB group and 3.2% in the CCAB group. The incidence of perioperative myocardial infarction was 0% in the OPCAB group and 3.2% in the CCAB group. The incidence of postoperative major complications was significantly lower in the OPCAB group than in the CCAB group (OPCAB group=4 complications, CCAB group=13 complications). Cerebrovascular accidents occurred in 1.6% of patients in both groups. The incidence of sternal infection or mediastinitis was 0% in the OPCAB group and 3.2% in the CCAB group. The early patency rate of graft was 94.0% in the OPCAB group and 92.8% in the CCAB group, and was not significantly different (p = 0.822).ConclusionOperative mortality and major complications after surgery in OPCAB were lower than that in CCAB. The early patency rate in OPCAB was as good as that in CCAB. It is considered that OPCAB is less invasive and the quality of bypass in OPCAB is as good as that in CCAB.

12 keywords...

hide…