The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Volume 133, Issue 3 , Pages 623-631 , March 2007

Does off-pump or minimally invasive coronary artery bypass reduce mortality, morbidity, and resource utilization when compared with percutaneous coronary intervention? A meta-analysis of randomized trials

Presented at the Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) Conference in Rome, June 20–22, 2005.

  • Daniel Bainbridge, MD, FRCPC

      Affiliations

    • Department of Anesthesia & Perioperative Medicine, London Health Sciences Centre, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
    • Assistant Professor.
    • ,
  • Davy Cheng, MD, MSc, FRCPC

      Affiliations

    • Department of Anesthesia & Perioperative Medicine, London Health Sciences Centre, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
    • Professor and Chair, Department of Anesthesia.
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress for reprints: D. Cheng, MD, MSc, FRCPC, Department of Anesthesia & Perioperative Medicine, London Health Sciences Centre—University Hospital, 339 Windermere Rd, Room 3-CA19, London, Ontario, Canada N6A 5A5.
    • ,
  • Janet Martin, PharmD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pharmacy, Physiology & Pharmacology, London Health Sciences Centre, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada
    • Director, High Impact Technology Evaluation Centre (HiTEC).
    • ,
  • Richard Novick, MD, MSc, FRCSC

      Affiliations

    • Division of Cardiac Surgery, London Health Sciences Centre, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.
    • Professor and Head, Division of Cardiac Surgery.
    • ,
  • The Evidence-based Peri-operative Clinical Outcomes Research (EPiCOR) Group

Received 11 September 2006 ,Revised 25 October 2006 ,Accepted 1 November 2006.

  • Image Result

    Identification of eligible trials: QUOROM flow chart. RCTs, Randomized clinical trials; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention.

    Identification of eligible trials: QUOROM flow chart. RCTs, Randomized clinical trials; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention.

  • Image Result

    Reintervention at 1 to 5 years: OPCAB versus PCI. OPCAB, off-pump coronary artery bypass; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention.

    Reintervention at 1 to 5 years: OPCAB versus PCI. OPCAB, off-pump coronary artery bypass; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention.

  • Image Result

    MACE at 1 to 5 years: OPCAB versus PCI. MACE, major adverse coronary events; OPCAB, off-pump coronary artery bypass; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention.

    MACE at 1 to 5 years: OPCAB versus PCI. MACE, major adverse coronary events; OPCAB, off-pump coronary artery bypass; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention.

  • Image Result

    Angina recurrence at 1 to 5 years: OPCAB versus PCI. OPCAB, off-pump coronary artery bypass; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention.

    Angina recurrence at 1 to 5 years: OPCAB versus PCI. OPCAB, off-pump coronary artery bypass; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention.

 Funding: Department of Anesthesia and Perioperative Medicine, University of Western Ontario and from an HTA Capacity Building Grant awarded by the Canadian Coordinating Office of Health Technology Assessment (CCOHTA). No funds were received from proprietary sources.Ethics approval was not required for the conduct of this study.

PII: S0022-5223(06)02119-2

doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2006.11.019

The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Volume 133, Issue 3 , Pages 623-631 , March 2007

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution