TY - JOUR
T1 - Surgical volume and outcomes of off-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery
T2 - Does it matter?
AU - Konety, Suma H.
AU - Rosenthal, Gary E.
AU - Vaughan-Sarrazin, Mary S.
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2018 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2009/5
Y1 - 2009/5
N2 - Objectives: Coronary artery bypass grafting performed off-pump has emerged in recent years as a less morbid alternative to on-pump bypass grafting. However, the impact of hospital volume on the outcomes of off-pump relative to on-pump bypass grafting has not been evaluated. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients undergoing off-pump (n = 26,011) and on-pump (n = 99,344) coronary artery bypass grafting during 2000 through 2004 in 124 California hospitals, using the California Patient Discharge Database. Generalized linear mixed models were used to compare in-hospital mortality and postoperative complications in patients undergoing on-pump versus off-pump bypass grafting, accounting sequentially for differences in patient characteristics and hospital-level effects. The relative mortality and complication rates for patients undergoing on-pump versus off-pump coronary bypass were evaluated across hospital volume quartiles. Results: Mean length of stay was lower for patients who underwent off-pump compared with on-pump bypass grafting (8.7 vs 9.6 days; P < .001), as were unadjusted mortality and complication rates (2.2% vs 3.3%; 10.1% vs 11.6%, respectively; P < .001). For hospitals in the highest percent off-pump bypass quartile, adjusted mortality and complication rates for patients having off-pump bypass were significantly lower than for the on-pump group (odds ratio [OR] = 0.50; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.41-0.61; OR = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.66-0.81, respectively; P < .001); by contrast, for hospitals in the lowest percent off-pump bypass quartile, mortality and complications were similar in off-pump and on-pump groups (OR = 1.10; 95% CI, 0.75-1.63; OR = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.72-1.16, respectively; P > .05). Conclusions: Outcomes were significantly better for off-pump compared with on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Although the benefit of off-pump bypass grafting increased as the relative use of the procedure at a hospital increased, off-pump bypass grafting can be safely implemented across numerous hospitals.
AB - Objectives: Coronary artery bypass grafting performed off-pump has emerged in recent years as a less morbid alternative to on-pump bypass grafting. However, the impact of hospital volume on the outcomes of off-pump relative to on-pump bypass grafting has not been evaluated. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients undergoing off-pump (n = 26,011) and on-pump (n = 99,344) coronary artery bypass grafting during 2000 through 2004 in 124 California hospitals, using the California Patient Discharge Database. Generalized linear mixed models were used to compare in-hospital mortality and postoperative complications in patients undergoing on-pump versus off-pump bypass grafting, accounting sequentially for differences in patient characteristics and hospital-level effects. The relative mortality and complication rates for patients undergoing on-pump versus off-pump coronary bypass were evaluated across hospital volume quartiles. Results: Mean length of stay was lower for patients who underwent off-pump compared with on-pump bypass grafting (8.7 vs 9.6 days; P < .001), as were unadjusted mortality and complication rates (2.2% vs 3.3%; 10.1% vs 11.6%, respectively; P < .001). For hospitals in the highest percent off-pump bypass quartile, adjusted mortality and complication rates for patients having off-pump bypass were significantly lower than for the on-pump group (odds ratio [OR] = 0.50; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.41-0.61; OR = 0.73; 95% CI, 0.66-0.81, respectively; P < .001); by contrast, for hospitals in the lowest percent off-pump bypass quartile, mortality and complications were similar in off-pump and on-pump groups (OR = 1.10; 95% CI, 0.75-1.63; OR = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.72-1.16, respectively; P > .05). Conclusions: Outcomes were significantly better for off-pump compared with on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Although the benefit of off-pump bypass grafting increased as the relative use of the procedure at a hospital increased, off-pump bypass grafting can be safely implemented across numerous hospitals.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=64649102529&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=64649102529&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2008.12.038
DO - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2008.12.038
M3 - Article
C2 - 19379976
AN - SCOPUS:64649102529
VL - 137
SP - 1116-1123.e1
JO - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
JF - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
SN - 0022-5223
IS - 5
ER -