[Comparative analysis of in-hospital and long-term results of patients with acute dysfunction of coronary bypass grafts depending on treatment tactics].

Q4 Medicine
A A Semagin, O P Lukin, A A Fokin
{"title":"[Comparative analysis of in-hospital and long-term results of patients with acute dysfunction of coronary bypass grafts depending on treatment tactics].","authors":"A A Semagin, O P Lukin, A A Fokin","doi":"10.17116/hirurgia202401150","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Comparative analysis of in-hospital and long-term mortality of patients in whom acute dysfunction of coronary bypass grafts was detected in the early postoperative period depending on conservative or surgical tactics.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>The study is a retrospective analysis of data from 8801 patients who underwent elective coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2011 and 2022 at the Federal Center for Cardiovascular Surgery (Russia, Chelyabinsk). Among them, 196 patients underwent emergency coronary artery bypass grafting due to suspected perioperative myocardial infarction in the early postoperative period. In 119 patients, dysfunction of coronary bypass grafts was detected, in 77 patients no pathological changes were found. The criteria for inclusion in the study were patients with dysfunction of coronary bypass grafts (<i>n</i>=119). The 1st group included patients who underwent conservative therapy (<i>n</i>=33), the 2nd group (<i>n</i>=86) included those who underwent repeated myocardial revascularization. The primary endpoint was hospital mortality, secondary endpoints were long-term mortality and adverse cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, repeat myocardial revascularization). Patients were surveyed via telephone.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In-hospital mortality in the group of surgical reintervention was 8.1%, in the group of conservative treatment - 9.1% (<i>p</i>=0.867). According to the results of multivariate analysis, predictors of hospital mortality in patients of both groups were extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (<i>p</i>=0.014), time of artificial circulation (<i>p</i>=0.031), duration of artificial ventilation (<i>p</i>=0.001), number of days in intensive care (<i>p</i><0.001). When analyzing long-term mortality using the Kaplan-Meier method in group 1 and group 2, no statistically significant differences were found; in the group of conservative therapy - 85±9.6 [66.2-103.7] months versus 108.2±4.8 [98.8-117.6] months in the surgery group (log-rank <i>p</i>=0.06). When analyzing long-term mortality from cardiovascular causes and the occurrence of adverse cardiovascular events, statistically significant differences were determined: in the group of conservative therapy - 92.5±9.3 [74.2-110.7] months versus 117.8±3.3 [111.2-124.3] months in the surgical treatment group (log-rank <i>p</i>=0.007) and 78.1±9.2 [60-96.3] months versus 98.9±3.9 [91.3-106.5] months (log-rank <i>p</i>=0.008), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In-hospital mortality was comparable between groups. Long-term mortality from cardiovascular causes and the number of adverse cardiovascular events were significantly higher in the conservative therapy group. With timely detection of acute dysfunction of coronary bypass grafts, an active surgical approach has an advantage over conservative tactics and can improve the long-term prognosis of patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":35986,"journal":{"name":"Khirurgiya","volume":" 1","pages":"50-57"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Khirurgiya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17116/hirurgia202401150","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Comparative analysis of in-hospital and long-term mortality of patients in whom acute dysfunction of coronary bypass grafts was detected in the early postoperative period depending on conservative or surgical tactics.

Material and methods: The study is a retrospective analysis of data from 8801 patients who underwent elective coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2011 and 2022 at the Federal Center for Cardiovascular Surgery (Russia, Chelyabinsk). Among them, 196 patients underwent emergency coronary artery bypass grafting due to suspected perioperative myocardial infarction in the early postoperative period. In 119 patients, dysfunction of coronary bypass grafts was detected, in 77 patients no pathological changes were found. The criteria for inclusion in the study were patients with dysfunction of coronary bypass grafts (n=119). The 1st group included patients who underwent conservative therapy (n=33), the 2nd group (n=86) included those who underwent repeated myocardial revascularization. The primary endpoint was hospital mortality, secondary endpoints were long-term mortality and adverse cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, repeat myocardial revascularization). Patients were surveyed via telephone.

Results: In-hospital mortality in the group of surgical reintervention was 8.1%, in the group of conservative treatment - 9.1% (p=0.867). According to the results of multivariate analysis, predictors of hospital mortality in patients of both groups were extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (p=0.014), time of artificial circulation (p=0.031), duration of artificial ventilation (p=0.001), number of days in intensive care (p<0.001). When analyzing long-term mortality using the Kaplan-Meier method in group 1 and group 2, no statistically significant differences were found; in the group of conservative therapy - 85±9.6 [66.2-103.7] months versus 108.2±4.8 [98.8-117.6] months in the surgery group (log-rank p=0.06). When analyzing long-term mortality from cardiovascular causes and the occurrence of adverse cardiovascular events, statistically significant differences were determined: in the group of conservative therapy - 92.5±9.3 [74.2-110.7] months versus 117.8±3.3 [111.2-124.3] months in the surgical treatment group (log-rank p=0.007) and 78.1±9.2 [60-96.3] months versus 98.9±3.9 [91.3-106.5] months (log-rank p=0.008), respectively.

Conclusion: In-hospital mortality was comparable between groups. Long-term mortality from cardiovascular causes and the number of adverse cardiovascular events were significantly higher in the conservative therapy group. With timely detection of acute dysfunction of coronary bypass grafts, an active surgical approach has an advantage over conservative tactics and can improve the long-term prognosis of patients.

[冠状动脉旁路移植术急性功能障碍患者住院和长期疗效比较分析(取决于治疗策略)]。
目的:对术后早期发现冠状动脉旁路移植术急性功能障碍的患者的院内和长期死亡率进行比较分析:比较分析在术后早期发现冠状动脉旁路移植术急性功能障碍的患者的院内死亡率和长期死亡率,具体取决于保守治疗还是手术治疗:本研究对2011年至2022年间在联邦心血管外科中心(俄罗斯,车里雅宾斯克)接受择期冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)的8801名患者的数据进行了回顾性分析。其中,196 名患者在术后早期因怀疑围手术期心肌梗死而接受了紧急冠状动脉旁路移植术。119 名患者的冠状动脉旁路移植术出现功能障碍,77 名患者的冠状动脉旁路移植术未发现病理变化。纳入研究的标准是冠状动脉旁路移植功能障碍患者(119 人)。第一组包括接受保守治疗的患者(33 人),第二组(86 人)包括接受重复心肌血管重建术的患者。主要终点是住院死亡率,次要终点是长期死亡率和不良心血管事件(心肌梗死、中风、重复心肌血管重建)。通过电话对患者进行了调查:结果:手术再介入组的院内死亡率为8.1%,保守治疗组为9.1%(P=0.867)。多变量分析结果显示,预测两组患者住院死亡率的因素分别是体外膜氧合(p=0.014)、人工循环时间(p=0.031)、人工通气时间(p=0.001)、重症监护天数(pp=0.06)。在分析心血管原因导致的长期死亡率和不良心血管事件的发生率时,确定了统计学上的显著差异:保守治疗组 - 92.5±9.3[74.2-110.7]个月,而手术治疗组为117.8±3.3[111.2-124.3]个月(log-rank p=0.007);保守治疗组为78.1±9.2[60-96.3]个月,而手术治疗组为98.9±3.9[91.3-106.5]个月(log-rank p=0.008):结论:两组患者的院内死亡率相当。保守治疗组心血管疾病导致的长期死亡率和不良心血管事件的数量明显高于保守治疗组。如果能及时发现冠状动脉旁路移植术的急性功能障碍,积极的手术方法比保守疗法更有优势,并能改善患者的长期预后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Khirurgiya
Khirurgiya Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
161
期刊介绍: Хирургия отдельных областей сердце, сосуды легкие пищевод молочная железа желудок и двенадцатиперстная кишка кишечник желчевыводящие пути печень
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信