| Summary: | <h4>Background</h4>No single randomized study has ever before addressed the safety of On-Pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs Off-Pump CABG in the setting of atrial fibrillation (AF) and data from small observational samples remain inconclusive.<h4>Methods and findings</h4>Procedural data from KROK (Polish National Registry of Cardiac Surgery Procedures) were retrospectively collected. Of initial 188,972 patients undergoing CABG, 7,913 presented with baseline AF (76.0% men, mean age 69.1±8.2) and underwent CABG without concomitant valve surgery between 2006-2019 in 37 reference centers across Poland. Mean follow-up was 4.7±3.5 years (median 4.3 IQR 1.7-7.4). Cox proportional hazards models were used for computations. Of included patients, 3,681 underwent On-Pump- (46.52%) as compared to 4,232 (53.48%) who underwent Off-Pump CABG. Patients in the latter group less frequently were candidates for complete revascularization (P<0.001). In an unadjusted comparison, On-Pump surgery was associated with significantly worse survival at 30 days: HR: 1.28; 95%CIs: (1.07-1.53); P = 0.007. Along the 13-year study period, the trend shifted in favor of On-Pump CABG: HR: 0.92; 95%CIs: (0.83-0.99); P = 0.005. After rigorous propensity matching, 636 pairs were identified. The direction and magnitude of treatment effects was sustained with HRs of 3.58; (95%CIs: 1.34-9.61); p = 0.001 and 0.74; [95%CIs: 0.56-0.98]; p = 0.036) for 30-day and late mortality respectively.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Off-Pump CABG offered 30-day survival benefit to patients undergoing CABG surgery and presenting with underlying AF. On-Pump CABG was associated with significantly improved survival at long term.
|
|---|