A comparison of two coronary artery bypass graft surgery techniques with respect to acute kidney injury

Deniz Sarp Beyazpınar; Bahadır Gültekin; Afşin Emre Kayıpmaz; Çağrı Kayıpmaz; Atilla Sezgin; Tufan Akın Giray; Cemil Kavalcı

doi:10.5606/tgkdc.dergisi.2015.11569

Deniz Sarp Beyazpınar¹, Bahadır Gültekin¹, Afşin Emre Kayıpmaz², Çağrı Kayıpmaz¹, Atilla Sezgin¹, Tufan Akın Giray², Cemil Kavalcı²

¹Başkent Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Kalp ve Damar Cerrahisi Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye
²Başkent Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Acil Tıp Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye

DOI : 10.5606/tgkdc.dergisi.2015.11569

Background: This study aims to compare the conventional coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and on-pump beating heart bypass grafting (OPBHB) with respect to acute kidney injury and subsequent dialysis requirement.

Methods: Between January 2012 and October 2013, medical records of 77 patients who underwent conventional CABG and 76 patients who underwent OPBHB for coronary artery disease in our clinic were retrospectively analyzed.

Results: There was no significant difference in preoperative renal function test results between the groups. However, there was a significant difference in cardiopulmonary bypass time and length of intensive care unit stay (p<0.05). Seven (9.21%) of 76 patients in OPBHB group and 11 (14.28%) of 77 patients in CABG group developed acute kidney injury; however, it did not indicate a statistically significant difference between the groups (p>0.05). One patient in OPBHB group and four patients in CABG group also needed dialysis.

Conclusion: Our study results suggest that OPBHB is superior to the conventional CABG in terms of acute kidney injury and, more importantly, development of acute renal failure in patients with a serum creatinine level of 1-1.3 mg/dL.

Keywords : Acute kidney injury; coronary artery bypass grafting; on-pump beating heart bypass grafting

Viewed : 9469

Downloaded : 1853