Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 294

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Off-Pump Versus On-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: Differences in Short-Term Outcomes and in Long-Term Mortality and Need for Subsequent Revascularization

Open access
Hannan, Edward L., Wu, Chuntao, Smith, Craig R., Higgins, Robert S.D., Carlson, Russell E., Culliford, Alfred T., Gold, Jeffrey P., Jones, Robert H.·2007·Circulation

Abstract

Background— Off-pump coronary artery bypass graft surgery (OPCAB) has been performed for many years, but its use is increasing in frequency, and it remains an open question whether OPCAB is associated with better outcomes than on-pump coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. Methods and Results— New York State patients who underwent either OPCAB with median sternotomy (13 889 patients) or on-pump CABG surgery (35 941 patients) between 2001 and 2004 were followed up via New York databases. Short- and long-term outcomes were compared after adjustment for patient risk factors and after patients were matched on the basis of significant predictors of type of CABG surgery. OPCAB had a significantly lower inpatient/30-day mortality rate (adjusted OR 0.81, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68 to 0.97), lower rates for 2 perioperative complications (stroke: adjusted OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.86; respiratory failure: adjusted OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.93), and a higher rate of unplanned operation in the same admission (adjusted OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.01 to 2.15). In the matched samples, no difference existed in 3-year mortality (hazard ratio 1.08, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.22), but OPCAB patients had higher rates of subsequent revascularization (hazard ratio 1.55, 95% CI 1.33 to 1.80). The 3-year OPCAB and on-pump survival rates for matched patients were 89.4% and 90.1%, respectively ( P =0.20). For freedom from subsequent revascularization, the respective rates were 89.9% and 93.6% ( P <0.0001). Conclusions— OPCAB is associated with lower in-hospital mortality and complication rates than on-pump CABG, but long-term outcomes are comparable, except for freedom from revascularization, which favors on-pump CABG.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/circulationaha.106.675595

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 294

Metadata

Authors
Hannan, E. L., Wu, C., Smith, C. R., Higgins, R. S. D., Carlson, R. E., Culliford, A. T., Gold, J. P., & Jones, R. H.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2007-09-04
Volume
116
Issue
10
Pages
1145-1152
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2095971385
Cited by
294
References
0
FWCI
25.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Off-Pump Versus On-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: Differences in Short-Term Outcomes and in Long-Term Mortality and Need for Subsequent Revascularization. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/circulationaha.106.675595
The paper
Hannan, E. L., Wu, C., Smith, C. R., Higgins, R. S. D., Carlson, R. E., Culliford, A. T., Gold, J. P., & Jones, R. H. (2007). Off-Pump Versus On-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery: Differences in Short-Term Outcomes and in Long-Term Mortality and Need for Subsequent Revascularization. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/circulationaha.106.675595

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.