Prophylactic intra-aortic balloon pump in patients with left main disease undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting.

BACKGROUND: Preventive intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) for high-risk patients with stable hemodynamics is controversial, and its definition of high-risk is still unclear. This study aimed to investigate the effect of prophylactic IABP on the early outcome of left main disease (LMD) patients receiving off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCABG) with stable hemodynamics. METHODS: From January 2013 to April 2020, 257 consecutive patients who underwent OPCABG through sternotomy were enrolled in this study. All LMD patients (greater than 70%) had stable hemodynamics (BP>100 mmHg without vasoconstrictor substance infusion). Early outcomes of 125 patients with prophylactic IABP (IABP group) and 132 patients without IABP (Control group) were compared in this study. RESULTS: IABP did not show favorable effect on the conversion to CPB (RR 0.63, 95%CI 0.05-7.89, P = 0.7211), perioperative MI (RR 0.69, 95%CI 0.22-2.12, P = 0.5163), mortality (RR 0.65, 95%CI 0.04-10.25, P = 0.7608) or the composite end of the conversion, MI and mortality (RR 0.63, 95%CI 0.23-1.74, P = 0.3747). There was greater incidence of prolonged ventilation in IABP after adjustment (RR2.16, 95%CI 1.12-4.18, P = 0.0221). There was no IABP-related mortality or limb ischemia. CONCLUSION: No significant difference in early outcomes was observed in hemodynamically stable patients with LMD between prophylactic IABP group and control group. Prophylactic IABP may be unnecessary in patients with LMD undergoing OPCABG.

Outcomes of Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Versus Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients Aged 18-45 Years with Diabetes Mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Debate on treatment for young patients with coronary artery disease still exists. This study aimed to investigate the intermediate- and long-term outcomes between coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients aged 18-45 years with diabetes mellitus (DM). METHODS: Between January 2006 and March 2016, a total of 2018 DM patients aged 18-45 years including 517 cases of CABG and 1501 cases of PCI were enrolled in the study. Using propensity score matching (PSM), 406 patients were matched from each group. The intermediate- and long-term data were collected. The primary end point of this study was long-term death. The secondary end points included long-term major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), stroke, angina, myocardial infarction (MI), and repeat revascularization. RESULTS: Before PSM, the in-hospital mortality was 1.2% in the CABG group and 0.1% in the PCI group, with statistically significant difference (P < 0.0001). The 10-year follow-up outcomes including long-term survival rate and freedom from MACCEs were better in the CABG group than those in the PCI group (97.3% vs. 94.5%, P = 0.0072; 93.2% vs. 86.3%, P < 0.0001), but CABG group was associated with lower freedom from stoke compared to PCI group (94.2% vs. 97.5%, P = 0.0059). After propensity score-matched analysis, these findings at 10-year follow-up were also confirmed. Freedom from MACCEs was higher in CABG group compared to PCI group, but no significant difference was observed (93.1% vs. 89.2%, P = 0.0720). The freedom from recurrent MI was significantly higher in CABG patients compared with PCI patients (95.6% vs. 92.5%, P = 0.0260). Furthermore, CABG was associated with a higher rate of long-term survival rate than PCI (97.5% vs. 94.6%, P = 0.0403). There was no significant difference in the freedom from stroke between CABG and PCI groups (95.3% vs. 97.3%, P = 0.9385). The hospital cost was greater for CABG (13,936 ± 4480 US dollars vs. 10,926 ± 7376 US dollars, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In DM patients aged 18-45 years, the cumulative survival rate, and freedom from MI and repeat revascularization for CABG were superior to those of PCI. However, a better trend to avoid stroke was observed with PCI.