Off-Pump Versus On-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting In Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Objectives: To compare the outcome of off-pump and on-pump coronary artery bypass graftsurgery in patients with left main coronary artery disease. METHODS: The randomised, controlled, prospective, multicentric study was conducted in 2020 during the period from January 2020 to December 2020 at Kafrelsheikh University Hospital, International Cardiac Centre and Alexandria New Medical Centre, Egypt, and comprised patients with left main coronary artery disease who underwent coronary artery bypass graftsurgery. The patients were randomised to on-pump surgery group I (Control Group) and off-pump surgery group II(Interventional Group). All patients were assessed pre-operatively for the presence of comorbid conditions and post-operatively for myocardial infarction, acute kidney injury, pneumonia, sternal dehiscence and 3-month mortality. Data was analysed using SPSS 20. RESULTS: Of the 60 patients, 44(73.3%) were men and 16(26.6%) were women. The overall mean age was 66.4±9.2 years. There were 30(50%) patients in each of the two groups. There were 2(6.7%) cases of myocardial infarction in group I and 1(3.3%) in group II. There was 1(3.3%) case of acute kidney injury in group I and none in group II. There were 3(10%) cases of pneumonia in group 1 compared to 1(3.3%) in group II. There was 1(3.3%) case of sternal dehiscence in group I and none in group II. Mortality at 3 months was 2(6.7%) in group I and 1(3.3%) in group II. There was no significant difference with respect to outcome between the groups (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Off-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery was found to be efficient and non-inferior to on-pump procedure in patients with left main coronary artery disease. RCT registration: The RCT was registered retrospectively at the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry (PACTR) (Trial #: PACTR202301506140749 Date of Approval: 06/01/2023). Link: https://pactr.samrc.ac.za/Search.aspx.

Off-Pump Versus On-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting In Patients With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Objectives: To compare the outcome of coronary artery bypass grafting with and without cardiopulmonary bypassin patients of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Method: The prospective randomised multicentre study was conducted in 2020 at Kafrelsheikh University Hospital, International Cardiac Centre and Alexandria New Medical Centre, Egypt. Patients regardless of age and gender who had ischaemic heart disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were enrolled, and randomised into on-pump procedure group 1 and off-pump procedure group II. All patients were assessed preoperatively for pulmonary function tests and postoperatively for duration of mechanical ventilation, respiratory failure, pneumonia, atrial fibrillation, acute respiratory distresssyndrome, pleural effusion, lung atelectasis, sternal dehiscence, intensive care unit stay and overall hospital stay. Data was analysed using SPSS ver 25 Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.; Released 2017. RESULTS: Of the 60 patients, 30(50%) were in each of the two groups. Overall, there were 20(33.3%) women and 40(66.6%) men with mean age 56.5±6.05 years. The mean duration of mechanical ventilation in group I was 12.07±5.18 minutes compared to 6.97±2.25 minutes in group II (p<0.001). The mean duration of stay in intensive care unit in group I was 4.17±1.64 days compared to 3.03±1.03 days in group II (p<0.001). The mean hospital stay was 7.40±1.90 days in group I and 5.93±1.17 days in group II (p<0.001). There was no significant difference between the groups regarding the frequency of respiratory failure, pneumonia, atrial fibrillation, acute respiratory distresssyndrome, pleural effusion, lung atelectasis and sternal dehiscence (p=1.000). CONCLUSIONS: Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting wasfound to be efficient and had a faster postoperative course than on-pump procedure in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Mini-Sternotomy Versus Conventional Sternotomy In Aortic Valve Replacement Surgery; A Comparative Study.

Objectives: To assess safety; efficacy and efficiency of mini-sternotomy in aortic valve replacement in comparison to conventional sternotomy on short term follow up. Method: This comparative study between 45 patients having aortic valve replacement via fullsternotomy versus 45 others planned for upper j-shaped mini-sternotomy, was conducted from May 2019 to February 2022 in Kafrelsheikh university hospital, Egypt. Data was collected and statistically analysed to assess outcomes. RESULTS: Mini-Sternotomy approach was compared to conventional approach on the aspects of cardio pulmonary bypass (CPB) (p=0.153) and cross clamp (CC) time (p=0.673),. There was significantly less postoperative bleeding (p<0.001), rate of blood transfusion (p<0.001), duration of ICU stay (p=0.013) and total hospitalstay (p=0.022) in ministernotomy approach in comparison to conventional sternotomy. CONCLUSIONS: For primary isolated AVR, lessinvasive techniques are a realistic, practical, and good alternative that offers better postoperative results than Full Sternotomy.