Premium
Beneficial Effect of Preventative Intra‐Aortic Balloon Pumping in High‐Risk Patients Undergoing First‐Time Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting—A Single Center Experience
Author(s) -
Gong Qingcheng,
Xing Jialin,
Miao Na,
Zhao Yanyan,
Jia Zaishen,
Li Jiawei,
Chen Yu,
Gao Quanxin,
Liu Anxin,
Sun Zhiquan,
Liu Xiaojun,
Ji Bingyang
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
artificial organs
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.684
H-Index - 76
eISSN - 1525-1594
pISSN - 0160-564X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1525-1594.2009.00788.x
Subject(s) - medicine , perioperative , intra aortic balloon pump , ejection fraction , myocardial infarction , cardiology , unstable angina , cardiogenic shock , intra aortic balloon pumping , surgery , artery , angina , inotrope , heart failure
Although intra‐aortic balloon pumping (IABP) has been used widely as a routine cardiac assist device for perioperative support in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), the optimal timing for high‐risk patients undergoing first‐time CABG using IABP is unknown. The purpose of this investigation is to compare preoperative and preventative IABP insertion with intraoperative or postoperative obligatory IABP insertion in high‐risk patients undergoing first‐time CABG. We reviewed our IABP patients' database from 2002 to 2007; there were 311 CABG patients who received IABP treatment perioperatively. Of 311 cases, 41 high‐risk patients who had first‐time on‐pump or off‐pump CABG (presenting with three or more of the following criteria: left ventricular ejection fraction less than 0.45, unstable angina, CABG combined with aneurysmectomy, or left main stenosis greater than 70%) entered the study. We compared perioperatively the clinical results of 20 patients who underwent preoperative IABP placement (Group 1) with 21 patients who had obligatory IABP placement intraoperatively or postoperatively during CABG (Group 2). There were no differences in preoperative risk factors, except left ventricular aneurysm resection, between the two groups. There were no differences in indications for high‐risk patients between the two groups. The mean number of grafts was similar. There were no significant differences in the need for inotropes, or in cerebrovascular, gastrointestinal, renal, and infective complications postoperatively. There were no IABP‐related complications in either group. Major adverse cardiac event (severe hypotension and/or shock, myocardial infarction, and severe hemodynamic instability) was higher in Group 2 (14 [66.4%] vs. 1 [5%], P < 0.0001) during surgery. The time of IABP pumping in Group 1 was shorter than in Group 2 (72.5 ± 28.9 h vs. 97.5 ± 47.7 h, P < 0.05). The duration of ventilation and intensive care unit stay in Group 1 was significantly shorter than in Group 2, respectively (22.0 ± 1.6 h vs. 39.6 ± 2.1 h, P < 0.01 and 58.0 ± 1.5 h vs. 98.5 ± 1.9 h, P < 0.005). There were no differences in mortality between the two groups ( n = 1 in Group 1 and n = 3 in Group 2). Preoperative and preventative insertion of IABP can be performed safely in selected high‐risk patients undergoing CABG, with results comparable to those in patients who received obligatory IABP intraoperatively and postoperatively. Therefore, earlier IABP support as part of surgical strategy may help to improve the outcome in high‐risk first‐time CABG patients.