Citations

Background Coronary artery bypass can be performed off pump (OPCAB) without cardiopulmonary bypass. However, trends over time for OPCAB versus on‐pump (ONCAB) use and long‐term outcome has not been reported, nor has their long‐term outcome been compared. Methods and Results We queried the national Veterans Affairs database (2005–2019) to identify isolated coronary artery bypass procedures. Procedures were classified as OPCAB on ONCAB using the as‐treated basis. Trend analyses were performed to evaluate longitudinal changes in the preference for OPCAB. The median follow‐up period was 6.6 (3.5–10) years. An inverse probability weighted Cox model was used to compare all‐cause mortality between OPCAB and ONCAB. From 47 685 patients, 6759 (age 64±8 years) received OPCAB (14%). OPCAB usage declined from 16% (2005–2009) to 8% (2015–2019). Patients with triple vessel disease who received OPCAB received a lower mean number of grafts (2.8±0.8 versus 3.2±0.8; P <0.01). The ONCAB 5‐, 10‐, and 15‐year survival rates were 82.9% (82.5–83.3), 60.4% (59.8–61.1), and 37.2% (36.1–38.4); correspondingly, OPCAB rates were 80.7% (79.7–81.7), 57.4% (56–58.7), and 34.1% (31.7–36.6) ( P <0.01). OPCAB was associated with increased risk‐adjusted all‐cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.15 [1.13–1.18]; P <0.01) and myocardial infarction (incident rate ratio, 1.16 [1.05–1.28]; P <0.01). Conclusions Over 15 years, OPCAB use declined considerably in Veterans Affairs medical centers. In Veterans Affairs hospitals, late all‐cause mortality and myocardial infarction rates were higher in the OPCAB cohort.

Aims Despite the common occurrence of coronary artery disease (CAD) and heart failure (HF) with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF), there is limited evidence to guide revascularization. Methods and Results We investigated the long‐term outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with HF and significant CAD across the spectrum of ejection fraction, using a large national cohort of patients from the Veteran Affairs (VA) Medical Centers in the US. Patients with HF were stratified into groups, HFpEF, HF with mid‐range ejection fraction (HFmrEF), and HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and compared to patients with no preoperative HF. We analysed 10 396 patients. Despite an increased hazard in the first year following revascularization, the long‐term survival (median follow‐up 6.6 years; interquartile range 3.7–10.1) of HFpEF post‐CABG was similar to controls (hazard ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.68‐1.06), but survival progressively declined with HFmrEF and HFrEF. Similar trends were seen with recurrent HF hospitalization with lower risk with baseline HFpEF (43.9 ± 6.9/100 patient‐years) compared to HFmrEF (65.9 ± 3.8/100 patient‐years) and HFrEF (93.4 ± 4.8/100 patient‐years). Although HFpEF patients had lower mortality and HF hospitalization post‐CABG compared to patients with a lower ejection fraction, they experienced the highest rates of future myocardial infarction. Conclusion Although HFpEF patients with CAD have greater short‐term risk post‐CABG, their long‐term survival is comparable to controls. However, they are at increased risk for HF hospitalizations and myocardial infarction. These data support the safety of CABG in HFpEF patients and suggest continuum of mortality risk for ischaemic HF when stratified by baseline ejection fraction before revascularization.