Use of cardiopulmonary pump support during coronary artery bypass grafting in the high-risk: a meta-analysis

Background: Data from randomized trials evaluating the efficacy of on- versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting remain inconclusive, particularly in high-risk populations. Aims: The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes associated with on- versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting among high-risk patients. Methods: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized control trials comparing on- versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting, focusing on high-risk populations. Studies focusing on “high-risk” features: European System of Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) ≥ 5, age > 70 years, preexisting renal insufficiency, history of stroke(s), and the presence of left ventricular dysfunction were included. MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase were searched for all publications between January 1, 2000 and August 1, 2016, using the following terms: on-pump, off-pump, coronary artery bypass, high-risk, left ventricular dysfunction, elderly, aged, and renal insufficiency. Endpoints included cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, need for revascularization, renal failure, and length of hospital stay. Results: Nine studies incorporating 11,374 patients with a mean age of 70 years were selected. There was no statistical difference in cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and renal failure between the two groups. There was a decrease in further revascularization at 1 year with on-pump (OR 0.67 (0.50–0.89)). However, there was an increase in length of hospital stay by 2.24 days (p = 0.03) among the on-pump group with no difference in stroke (OR 1.34 (1.00–1.80)). Conclusions: On-pump is associated with a decreased risk of additional revascularization by 1 year. However, this appears to be a cost of longer hospitalization.