We have located links that may give you full text access.
Safety and cost-effectiveness of MIDCABG in high-risk CABG patients.
Annals of Thoracic Surgery 1998 September
BACKGROUND: Myocardial revascularization without cardiopulmonary bypass has been proposed as a potential therapeutic alternative in high-risk patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting. To evaluate this possibility we compared 15 high-risk (HR) patients in whom minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass grafting was used as the method of revascularization with 41 consecutive patients who underwent conventional coronary artery bypass grafting during 1 month.
METHODS: Patients undergoing myocardial revascularization without cardiopulmonary bypass were significantly older than their low-risk (LR) counterparts (72.2 +/- 11.6 versus 63.3 +/- 9.7 years, p = 0.006). The demographic profile for HR versus LR patients was as follows: female patients, 60.0% versus 26.8%, p = 0.02; diabetes, 20.0% versus 24.4%, p = 0.7; prior stroke, 33.3% versus 7.4%, p = 0.03; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 60.0% versus 9.8%, p < 0.0001; peripheral vascular disease, 33.3% versus 12.2%, p = 0.03, congestive heart failure, 26.6% versus 9.8%, p = 0.09; impaired left ventricular (ejection fraction < 0.40), 40.0% versus 17.0%, p = 0.07; urgent operation, 86.6% versus 46.3%, p < 0.0001; and redo operation, 20.0% versus 0%, p = 0.003.
RESULTS: There were no deaths in the HR group and one death in the LR group. The average intensive care unit stay was 1.1 +/- 0.5 days in HR patients versus 1.6 +/- 1.6 days in LR individuals (p = 0.2), and the average hospital stay was 6.1 +/- 1.8 versus 7.3 +/- 4.4 days, respectively (p = 0.3). We used an acuity risk score index developed by the Adult Cardiac Care Network of Ontario to predict outcome in the HR group. The expected intensive care unit stay in HR patients was 4.1 +/- 1.2 days (versus the observed stay of 1.1 +/- 0.5 days, p < 0.0001), and the expected hospital stay was 12.5 +/- 1.5 days (versus the observed stay of 6.1 +/- 1.8 days, p < 0.0001). The expected mortality in the HR group was 6.1% versus 0%, p = 0.3. A cost regression model was used to examine predicted versus actual cost (in Canadian dollars) for the HR patient cohort (based on Ontario Ministry of Health funding). The expected cost for the HR cohort would have been $11,997 per patient. In contrast, the average cost for these 15 patients was $5,997 per patient, an estimated cost saving of 50%.
CONCLUSIONS: Myocardial revascularization without cardiopulmonary bypass appears to be a safe and cost-effective therapeutic modality for HR patients requiring myocardial revascularization.
METHODS: Patients undergoing myocardial revascularization without cardiopulmonary bypass were significantly older than their low-risk (LR) counterparts (72.2 +/- 11.6 versus 63.3 +/- 9.7 years, p = 0.006). The demographic profile for HR versus LR patients was as follows: female patients, 60.0% versus 26.8%, p = 0.02; diabetes, 20.0% versus 24.4%, p = 0.7; prior stroke, 33.3% versus 7.4%, p = 0.03; chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 60.0% versus 9.8%, p < 0.0001; peripheral vascular disease, 33.3% versus 12.2%, p = 0.03, congestive heart failure, 26.6% versus 9.8%, p = 0.09; impaired left ventricular (ejection fraction < 0.40), 40.0% versus 17.0%, p = 0.07; urgent operation, 86.6% versus 46.3%, p < 0.0001; and redo operation, 20.0% versus 0%, p = 0.003.
RESULTS: There were no deaths in the HR group and one death in the LR group. The average intensive care unit stay was 1.1 +/- 0.5 days in HR patients versus 1.6 +/- 1.6 days in LR individuals (p = 0.2), and the average hospital stay was 6.1 +/- 1.8 versus 7.3 +/- 4.4 days, respectively (p = 0.3). We used an acuity risk score index developed by the Adult Cardiac Care Network of Ontario to predict outcome in the HR group. The expected intensive care unit stay in HR patients was 4.1 +/- 1.2 days (versus the observed stay of 1.1 +/- 0.5 days, p < 0.0001), and the expected hospital stay was 12.5 +/- 1.5 days (versus the observed stay of 6.1 +/- 1.8 days, p < 0.0001). The expected mortality in the HR group was 6.1% versus 0%, p = 0.3. A cost regression model was used to examine predicted versus actual cost (in Canadian dollars) for the HR patient cohort (based on Ontario Ministry of Health funding). The expected cost for the HR cohort would have been $11,997 per patient. In contrast, the average cost for these 15 patients was $5,997 per patient, an estimated cost saving of 50%.
CONCLUSIONS: Myocardial revascularization without cardiopulmonary bypass appears to be a safe and cost-effective therapeutic modality for HR patients requiring myocardial revascularization.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app