Autori: Adrian Aron, Klinger TA, McConnell TR

Editorial: Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention, 27(1), p.35-41, 2007.

Rezumat:

PURPOSE: Clinical evidence supports lower morbidity with off-pump coronary revascularization surgery as well as superior short- and mid-term outcomes, equivalent graft patency, and reduced cost. The purpose of this study was to compare cardiac rehabilitation (CR) outcomes between patients undergoing on-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery. METHODS: Data were retrospectively examined for patients who participated in CR between 1996 and 2004. Two hundred ninety-five patients who underwent bypass surgery and completed at least 80% of their 36 required sessions were divided into on-pump and off-pump groups. Pre- and post-CR measures included grip strength, flexibility, energy expended during class, quality of life, and self-efficacy. RESULTS: Both groups were similar with respect to age, sex, ejection fraction, and mean number of grafts. There were no statistical differences between the on-pump and off-pump groups (P > .05) for weight, abdominal and hip circumferences, grip strength, flexibility, and total energy expenditure. In addition, there were no between-group differences regarding quality of life and self-efficacy. Grip strength, flexibility, and energy expenditure during class improved with CR regardless of the surgical procedure (P = .001). Quality of life (P = .001) and self-efficacy (P = .001) also improved. CONCLUSIONS: The present data support the concept that although there are clinical advantages to off-pump surgery, there is no benefit over on-pump surgery regarding CR. Subsequently, patients undergoing off-pump surgery should be managed similarly as their on-pump counterparts.

Cuvinte cheie: off-pump bypass surgery, cardiac rehabilitation

URL: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17474642?ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum