Lower risks to patients, advances in international practice and substantial resource savings result from ‘beating heart’ off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery
Submitting Institution
University of BristolUnit of Assessment
Clinical MedicineSummary Impact Type
TechnologicalResearch Subject Area(s)
Medical and Health Sciences: Cardiorespiratory Medicine and Haematology, Clinical Sciences, Public Health and Health Services
Summary of the impact
University of Bristol researchers at the Bristol Heart Institute (BHI)
have pioneered the development and clinical take-up of the novel technique
of off-pump coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) surgery. Over ten clinical
trials and several large cohort analyses have assessed the impact of this
technique on elective and high-risk patients. The results have shown that
it is as safe as the conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)
technique that uses a cardiopulmonary bypass pump and cardioplegic arrest.
Most importantly, however, OPCAB significantly reduces the risk of
post-operative complications, and reduces morbidity and mortality. It also
uses less hospital resources, reducing time in intensive care and length
of hospital stay. In 2011 (the last year for which data are available),
20% of CABG operations in the UK were carried out with the OPCAB technique
and it has had significant take-up overseas (for example, 18% of CABG
operations in the US and 21% in the EU in 2010). NICE has recommended the
safety and efficacy of OPCAB surgery.
Underpinning research
Conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery in an
increasingly high-risk population (caused by increasing age, smoking,
diabetes, hypertension and high cholesterol) involves stopping the heart
(cardioplegic arrest, CA) and the use of a cardiopulmonary bypass pump
(CPB). The use of CA and CPB in these patients is associated with
significant in-hospital mortality and morbidity due to its
non-physiological nature. To overcome these problems, researchers from the
University of Bristol at the Bristol Heart Institute (BHI) have pioneered
the novel and alternative technique of off-pump coronary artery bypass
surgery (OPCAB), avoiding the use of both CA and CPB. The BHI is an
internationally recognised centre of excellence for performing
translational cardiovascular research that takes basic science discoveries
to the clinic.
OPCAB has been developed and validated at the BHI since 1997 by a team
led by Professor Gianni Angelini, British Heart Foundation Professor of
Cardiac Surgery, and Professor Raimondo Ascione, Professor of Cardiac
Surgery & Translational Research (Clinical Research Fellow in Cardiac
Surgery at the BHI in 1997). Other key research team members include
Professor Barnaby Reeves (Professor of Health Services Research and
Honorary Senior Lecturer in Epidemiology in 2002 when he joined the BHI)
and Mr Alan Bryan (Consultant Cardiac Surgeon and responsible for the BHI
data registry since 1998). The development and validation process has
involved over ten trials and several large cohort analyses from the BHI
data registry.
Preliminary work between 1997 and 1998 focused on the development of a
reproducible surgical technique with use of locally developed tools. The
established technique was reported in 2001.[1] A series of small trials
assessed its impact on subsystem organ function in 1997-98, including
myocardial,[2] renal,[3] respiratory, cerebral and inflammation. Larger
trials followed (Beating Heart Against Cardioplegic Arrest Studies
1&2) in 1999-2001,[4, 5] with follow-up in 2003 [6] and 2008,
assessing late symptoms and graft patency rate. In addition, case cohort
studies (2001-2006) assessed the impact on in-hospital and mid-term
clinical end-points, including mortality in elective and high-risk
patients. A further trial focused for the first time on cerebral and
retinal micro-embolisation.[7] The BHI conducted and published the world's
first randomised study on OPCAB surgery.[2] No other centres were
rigorously validating the same approach in parallel, as is evident from
the absence of concomitant randomised trials published by others. Thus the
procedure was validated through rigorous studies from 1997 to 2008,
showing that patients benefited directly in terms of reductions in
in-hospital morbidity,[5] blood loss, transfusion requirement,[4] chest
infection, inotropic support,[5] arrhythmias,[a] cerebral embolisation and
renal injury [3] when compared with conventional technique in elective
patients, without affecting mid- and long-term benefit.[6] The research
has been funded to a total of approximately £3m. The first two funding
grants were awarded in 1997 and 2001.[7, 8]
References to the research
Peer-reviewed journal publications
[1] Watters MP, Ascione R, Ryder IG, Ciulli F, Pitsis AA, Angelini GD.
Haemodynamic changes during beating heart coronary surgery with the
'Bristol Technique'. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2001 Jan;19(1):34-40. DOI:
10.1016/S1010-7940(00)00603-5
[2] R Ascione, CT Lloyd, WJ Gomes, M Caputo, AJ Bryan, GD Angelini.
Beating versus arrested heart revascularization: evaluation of myocardial
function in a prospective randomised study. Eur J Cardio-Thoracic Surg;
1999;15:685-690. DOI: 10.1016/S1010-7940(99)00072-X
[3] Ascione R, Lloyd CT, Underwood MJ, Gomes WJ, Angelini GD. On-pump
versus off-pump coronary revascularization: evaluation of renal function.
Ann Thorac Surg. 1999 Aug;68(2):493-8. DOI: 10.1016/S0003-4975(99)00566-4
[4] R Ascione, S Williams, CT Lloyd, T Soondaramorthi, AA Pitsis, GD
Angelini. Reduced postoperative blood loss and transfusion requirement
after beating-heart coronary operations: a prospective randomised study. J
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2001;121:689-96. DOI: 10.1067/mtc.2001.112823
[5] GD Angelini, FC Taylor, BC Reeves, R Ascione. Early and mid-term
outcome after off-pump and on-pump surgery in Beating Heart Against
Cardioplegic Arrest Studies (BHACAS 1 and 2): a pooled analysis of two
randomised controlled trials. Lancet 2002;359:1194-99. DOI:
10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08216-8
[6] Ascione R, Reeves BC, Seehra H, Taylor FC, Angelini GD. Beating Heart
Against Cardioplegic Arrest Studies (BHACAS 1 and 2): quality of life at
mid-term follow-up in two randomised controlled trials. Eur Heart J
2004;25:765-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.ehj.2003.11.015
Peer reviewed grants
[7] Angelini GD. Coronary artery revascularisation without
cardiopulmonary bypass: a prospective randomised controlled study.
1997-1999. Sir Siegmund Warburg Voluntary Settlement £69,876
[8] Ascione R, Bryan AJ, Angelini GD. On pump versus off pump coronary
surgery: evaluation of small intestinal, pancreatic and liver function.
2001-2002. BHF £53,610
Details of the impact
Impact on patients
As a result of the trials and cohort studies, the BHI team demonstrated
that the technique they developed is as safe as conventional CABG using a
cardiopulmonary bypass pump.[1-6] A 2010 study sought to compare off- and
on-pump surgery through a systematic review and meta-analysis of
propensity score analyses.[a] The estimated overall odds ratio was less
than 1 for all outcomes, favouring off-pump surgery. This benefit was
statistically significant for mortality (odds ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence
interval (CI) 0.60-0.75), stroke, renal failure, red blood cell
transfusion, wound infection, prolonged ventilation, inotropic support,
and intra-aortic balloon pump support. The study found off-pump surgery
superior to on-pump surgery in all of the assessed short-term outcomes.
This advantage was statistically significant and clinically important for
most outcomes, including mortality. These results agree with previous
systematic reviews of randomised and non-randomised trials. A 2009 study
analysed the risk reduction of cardiopulmonary bypass complications
between on-pump and off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting in high-risk
patients. In the intention to treat analysis, the rate of the composite
primary end point was significantly lower in the off-pump group (5.8%
versus 13.3%). The risk of experiencing the primary end point was
significantly greater for the on-pump group (unadjusted odds ratio, 2.51;
95% CI, 1.23-5.10; P = 0.011; adjusted odds ratio, 3.07; 95% CI,
1.32-7.14; P = 0.009). The study concluded that OPCAB reduces early
mortality and morbidity in high-risk patients.[b]
A 2013 study queried the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Cardiac
Database for all patients undergoing non-emergency, isolated coronary
artery bypass from 2005 to 2010, who had Predicted Risk of Mortality
scores and participant/surgeon identifiers. Of these 876,081 patients
("all sites"), 210,469 underwent surgery at participant sites that had
performed more than 300 off-pump and 300 on-pump coronary artery bypass
operations during the 6-year study period ("high-volume sites"). A number
of outcomes were analysed with conditional logistic models for all sites
and for high-volume sites, stratified by participant centre and surgeon,
and adjusted for 30 variables that comprise the Society of Thoracic
Surgeons CABG risk models. In this analysis, OPCAB was associated with
reduced risk of death, stroke, acute renal failure, mortality or
morbidity, and prolonged length of stay after adjustment for 30 patient
risk factors and stratifying for both centre and surgeon identity. OPCAB
had a significantly greater reduction in these adverse events in patients
with higher patient reported outcome scores. The benefit of OPCAB,
therefore, may be more apparent in high-risk patients.[c] The European
Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) Adult Cardiac Surgical
Database Report 2010, contains information on over one million patients
undergoing adult cardiac surgery in 366 hospitals in 29 countries across
Europe and China. It reports an associated mortality rate of 1.4% (OPCAB)
versus 2.9%.[d]
Impact on international practice
Many surgeons had previously been reluctant to take up OPCAB because of
concerns that the technique required surgery on the beating heart,
potentially causing late blockage of the grafted arteries. The literature
on graft patency from randomised controlled trials of OPCAB versus
CABG-CPB is inconsistent, and studies conducted in 2005-6 reported
findings for only relatively short durations of follow-up [e]. To address
these concerns, the BHI has conducted and published in 2009 the longest
follow-up study in the world directly comparing the two techniques.
Participants in two randomised trials previously undertaken at the BHI
comparing OPCAB and CABG-CPB were followed up for six to eight years after
surgery. The findings conclusively demonstrated that the likelihood of
graft occlusion was no different between OPCAB (10.6%) and CABG-CPB
(11.0%) [f].
These data were presented and discussed at the 88th Annual Meeting of The
American Association for Thoracic Surgery in May 2008 (the world's largest
gathering of cardiac surgeons). The discussion clearly demonstrated that
in Japan, surgeons have adopted this technique for about 60% of patients
undergoing CABG, and in the Japan's National Cardiovascular Centre 98% of
CABG procedures have been performed using OPCAB. Currently, it is
estimated that 20-25% of CABG operations worldwide are carried out with
the OPCAB technique. The National Adult Cardiac Surgery Audit 2010-11 [g]
reported that more than 26,000 CABG operations in the UK in 2011 used
OPCAB (20% of all such operations). In the US, 18% of CABG operations are
carried out with the OPCAB technique as of 2010.[h] The EACTS Adult
Cardiac Surgical Database Report 2010 notes that in 29 countries across
Europe and China, "21% of those patients undergoing coronary artery
surgery in which the technique is described had off-pump surgery. This
varies between countries from 0.8% up to 91.4%.".[d] The report details
that 61% of CABG procedures have been performed using the OPCAB in
China.[d] Of the 95,000 CABG performed per year in India, 30% had off-pump
surgery.[i] OPCAB surgery is now routine practice for five out of the
seven Consultant Cardiac Surgeons at the BHI Hospital, constituting
>95% of their coronary surgical practice. The total number of OPCAB
cases at the BHI has gone from <5% (25-30 cases per year) in 1995 to
>75% (>750 cases per year; >8000 cases in total) in 2011.[j]
NICE has recommended the safety and efficacy of OPCAB surgery, through
interventional procedure guidance noting that, "Current evidence on the
safety and efficacy of off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting is
adequate to support the use of this procedure provided that normal
arrangements are in place for clinical governance, consent and audit".[k]
An effective programme of training in OPCAB surgery has been implemented
at the BHI.[k] Once surgeons are trained and accustomed to do it, they are
reluctant to go back to CABG-CPB because they are more comfortable with
the OPCAB technique and its reduction in early post-operative morbidity
and use of resources. Consultants trained in beating heart coronary
surgery at the BHI and now performing this surgery elsewhere include six
in the UK outside of Bristol, and the following consultants
internationally: Mr A Gosh, Consultant Cardiac Surgeon, Kolkata, India; Mr
P Narayan, Consultant Cardiac Surgeon, Kolkata, India; Professor W Gomes,
Professor of Cardiac Surgery, San Paolo, Brazil; Mr A Pitsis, Consultant
Cardiac Surgeon, Athens, Greece; Mr W Dihmis, Consultant Cardiac Surgeon,
Amman, Jordan; Mr B Izzat, Professor of Cardiac Surgery, Damascus, Syria.
Impact on resources
The OPCAB technique has had a profound impact on hospital resources and
cost, with a 25% saving per patient. A 2003 BHI study recorded a dramatic
reduction in intensive care unit and hospital stay [5], as shown in the
following table:
|
CABG |
OPCAB |
ICU stay (>1 day) |
22% |
7% |
Hospital stay (>7 days) |
29% |
15% |
The reduction in hospital stay was confirmed in 2013 in a study that
reported an odds ratio of 0.77 for postoperative length of stay across all
of the sites analysed (adjusted by patient).[c] A 2005 meta-analysis
examined five studies which have reported on the in-hospital costs and
each of them showed OPCAB to be less costly than CABG, with an odds ratio
of 0.77 across all of the sites analysed (adjusted by patient).[e] The
study included a collation of all the hospital costs from the date of
surgery to the date of discharge including all patient services and
supplies. The study calculated an average cost per patient of $23,053 for
CABG and $17,780 for OPCAB. Across the 26,000 operations in the UK in 2011
using OPCAB, this equates to a saving of US$137 million.
Sources to corroborate the impact
[a] Kuss O, von Salviati B, Borgermann J. Off-pump versus on-pump
coronary artery bypass grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis of
propensity score analyses. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2010;140;829-35. DOI:
10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.12.022. Corroborates superiority of off-pump to
on-pump in short term outcomes including stroke, renal failure and
mortality.
[b] Puskas JD, Thourani VH, Kilgo P, et al. Off-pump coronary artery
bypass disproportionately benefits high-risk patients. Ann Thorac Surg
2009;88:1142-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2009. 04.135. Corroborates that
OPCAB reduces early mortality and morbidity.
[c] Polomsky M, He X, O'Brien Sm, Puskas JD. Outcomes of off-pump versus
on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: Impact of preoperative risk. J
Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2013;145;1193-1198. DOI:
10.1016/j.jtcvs.2013.02.002. Corroborates that OPCAB was associated with
reduced risk of death, stroke, renal failure, mortality or morbidity, and
prolonged length of stay.
[d] EACTS Adult Cardiac Surgical Database Report, 2010. Corroborates use
of OPCAB across Europe and China.
[e] Wijeysundera DN, Beattie WS, Djaiani G, Rao V, Borger MA, Karkouti K,
et al. Off pump coronary artery surgery for reducing mortality and
morbidity: meta-analysis of randomized and observational studies. J Am
Coll Cardiol. 2005;46:872-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.05.064.
Corroborates reduced costs of OPCAB.
[f] GD. Angelini, L Culliford, D Smith, M Hamilton, G Murphy, R Ascione,
et al. Effects of on- and off-pump coronary artery surgery on graft
patency, survival and quality of life: long term follow-up of two
randomised controlled trials. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009;137:295-303.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2008.09.046. Corroborates that OPCAB does not cause
long term blockage of the grafted arteries.
[g] 6th National Adult Cardiac Surgical Database Report-Blue Book, http://www.scts.org/.
Corroborates number of OPCAB surgeries performed in UK.
[h] STS Database Registry 2010, http://www.sts.org/quality-research-patient-safety/sts-public-reporting-online.
Corroborates number of CABG surgeries performed in US.
[i] Senior Vice Chairman, Medica Superspecialty Hospital Kolkata. India.
Corroborates number of OPCAB surgeries performed in India.
[j] BHI Adult Cardiac Surgery Activity Audit Report 2010-11. Corroborates
number of OPCAB surgeries performed at BHI hospital.
[k] NICE. `Off-pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting'. NICE interventional
procedure guidance 377. January 2011. www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/11034/52580/52580.pdf.
Corroborates NICE recommendation of OPCAB surgery.
[l] M Murzi, M Caputo, G Aresu, S Duggan, GD. Angelini. Training
residents in off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery: A 14-year
experience. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2012;143:1247-53. DOI:
10.1016/j.jtcvs.2011.09.049.