Dataset Information

A meta-analysis of randomized trials for repeat revascularization following off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

ABSTRACT: To determine whether repeat revascularization rates are increased following off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of off-pump vs on-pump CABG. Databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched through March 2013 using web-based search engines (PubMed, OVID). Studies considered for inclusion met the following criteria: the design was a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial; the study population was patients undergoing CABG; patients were randomly assigned to off-pump vs on-pump CABG and outcomes included repeat revascularization rates at ?1 year. Our exhaustive search identified 12 prospective randomized controlled trials of off-pump vs on-pump CABG. Pooled analysis demonstrated a statistically significant 38% increase in repeat revascularization rates with off-pump relative to on-pump CABG in the fixed-effects model (odds ratio, 1.38; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.76; P = 0.008). In general, exclusion of any single trial from the analysis did not substantively alter the overall result of our analysis. There was no evidence of significant publication bias. The results of our analysis suggest that off-pump CABG may increase repeat revascularization rates by 38% over on-pump CABG.

SUBMITTER: Takagi H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3805204 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A meta-analysis of randomized trials for repeat revascularization following off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

Takagi Hisato H Mizuno Yusuke Y Niwa Masao M Goto Shin-nosuke SN Umemoto Takuya T

Interactive cardiovascular and thoracic surgery 20130721 5

To determine whether repeat revascularization rates are increased following off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of off-pump vs on-pump CABG. Databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched through March 2013 using web-based search engines (PubMed, OVID). Studies considered for inclusion met the following criteria: the design was a prospective randomized controlled cl ...[more]

PMID: 23876842

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe concept of hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines the left internal mammary artery (LIMA)-left anterior descending (LAD) graft and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to non-LAD vessels. Multiple comparative studies have evaluated the safety and feasibility of HCR and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for multivessel coronary artery disease (MCAD). However, the sample size of each study was small, and evidences based on single-institutional experience. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the short-term outcomes of HCR with those of CABG for MCAD.MethodPubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases, as well as conference proceedings, were searched for eligible studies published up to March 2014. We calculated summary odds ratios (OR) for primary endpoints (death, stroke; myocardial infarction (MI); target vessel revascularization (TVR); major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCEs)) and secondary endpoints (atrial fibrillation (AF); renal failure; length of stay in the intensive care unit (LoS in ICU); length of stay in hospital (LoS in hospital); red blood cell (RBC) transfusion). Data from 6176 participants were derived from ten cohort studies.ResultsHCR was non-inferior to CABG in terms of MACCEs during hospitalization (odds ratio (OR), 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34-1.33)and at one-year follow-up(0.32, 0.05-1.89) , and no significant difference was found between HCR and CABG groups in in-hospital and one-year follow-up outcomes of death, MI, stroke, the prevalence of AF and renal failure, whereas HCR was associated with a lower requirement of RBC transfusion and shorter LoS in ICU and LoS in hospital than CABG (weighted mean difference (WMD) -1.25, 95% CI, -1.62 to -0.88; -17.47, -31.01 to -3.93; -1.77, -3.07 to -0.46; respectively).ConclusionOur meta-analysis indicates that HCR is feasible, safe and effective for the treatment of MCAD, with similar in-hospital and one-year follow-up outcome, significantly lower requirement of RBC transfusion, and faster recovery compared with CABG.

Dataset Information

A meta-analysis of randomized trials for repeat revascularization following off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

Publications

A meta-analysis of randomized trials for repeat revascularization following off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets