Comparison of hybrid coronary revascularization versus conventional Coronary Artery Bypass surgery in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease in a real-world setting: In-hospital outcomes and medium-term follow-up: COHOS study
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2025-04
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Elsevier
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this observational study was to evaluate the in-hospital and medium-term outcomes of hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) in the real-world setting compared to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Methods: All patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease (MV-CAD) who underwent conventional CABG and HCR in our institution between January 2018 to January 2021 were evaluated in terms of length of intensive care unit (ICU), in-hospital stay, repeat revascularization rates, bleeding, stroke, and in-hospital mortality. Clinical outcomes (mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events [MACCE]) were assessed at average follow up of 3.6 years. Results: Pre-procedural characteristics were balanced between the groups after propensity score matching. There was no significant difference in MACCE [Odds ratio: 0.57; 95 % CI: 0.05 to 1.52; p = 0.66], in-hospital mortality [n = 2 (1.9 %) vs n = 0; p = 0.80], post procedure stroke [n = 2 (1.9 %) vs n = 2 (3.7 %); p = 0.86], post- procedural myocardial infarction requiring repeat revascularization [n = 2 (1.9 %) versus n = 1 (1.9 %); p = 1] during the in-hospital stay of the patients in the CABG vs HCR groups respectively. HCR was associated with significantly lower requirement for blood transfusions, bleeding risk, in-hospital stay, and intensive care unit stay. Analysis of the outcomes after 3.6 years revealed no significant difference in MACCE [Odds ratio: 1.40; 95 % CI: 0.46 to 4.30; p = 0.55], and post discharge mortality [n = 0 vs n = 0; p = 1]. Both groups had similar rates of post-procedural myocardial infarction requiring repeat revascularization [n = 0 vs n = 4 (7.4 %); p = 0.278], and rate of re-intervention [n = 0 vs n = 3 (5.6 %); p = 0.41]. Conclusion: HCR may be considered as a safe and feasible alternative to conventional CABG in selected in- dividuals with MV-CAD.
Description
Keywords
Hybrid coronary revascularization, Coronary Artery Bypass graft, Percutaneous coronary intervention, Robotic surgical procedures
Citation
Kaliyamoorthy Dhamodaran, Yusuf Meeranghani Mohamed, Ramalingam Vadivelu, Kasha Abhishek, Kathiresan Manickam, Abdulkader Rizwan Suliankatchi, Kathiresan Jeyashree, Kumar Aishwarya Mahesh, Grace Elsa, Choudhury Anirban. Comparison of hybrid coronary revascularization versus conventional Coronary Artery Bypass surgery in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease in a real-world setting: In-hospital outcomes and medium-term follow-up: COHOS study. Indian Heart Journal. 2025 Apr; 77(2): 98-104