Meta-Analysis of Repeat Revascularization of Off-Pump and On-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery

There is an ongoing debate focusing on clinical outcomes after off-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery (OPCABG) and on-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery (ONCABG). The objective of the present meta-analysis is to update and compare repeat revascularization rates between OPCABG and ONCABG procedures.

Data sources including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and ISI Web of Knowledge were searched between 1966 and October 2017. Studies considered for inclusion should conform to the following criteria: prospective randomized clinical trials comparing OPCABG and ONCABG. Outcome should include repeat revascularization rate at the time of 1-month, 1-year, or 5-year follow-up.

A literature search yielded 11 randomized controlled trials, and a total of 11,246 patients were randomly allocated to OPCABG or ONCABG procedures. Pooled analysis demonstrated a statistically significant 53% increase in repeat revascularization rate at 1-year follow-up with OPCABG relative to ONCABG in the fixed effects model (odds ratio 1.53, 95% confidence interval: 1.17 to 2.00, p = 0.002), whereas there was no significant difference in repeat revascularization rate at 5-year follow-up between OPCABG and ONCABG in the fixed effects model (OR 1.16, 95% confidence interval: 0.95 to 1.41, p = 0.14). In general, exclusion of any single trial did not affect repeat revascularization rate at 1-year and 5-year follow-up. There was no evidence of significant publication bias.

The result of our meta-analysis suggests that compared with ONCABG, OPCABG increases repeat revascularization rate at 1-year follow-up, but does not affect that of 5-year follow-up.