1998
DOI: 10.1007/bf03217884
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Coronary artery bypass grafting in cases with poor left ventricular function

Abstract: From January 1987 through June 1992, 18 patients with poor left ventricular function (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] less than 0.3) underwent elective isolated primary coronary artery bypass surgery. The mean age was 56.4 years (range, 46 to 72 years), and 15 were males and 3 were females. Mean pre-operative LVEF measured by ventriculography was 0.26 +/- 0.03 (range, 0.19 to 0.30). Sixteen patients (88.9%) had a prior myocardial infarction and 9 (50%) had a history of congestive heart failure. Compl… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2003
2003

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 11 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…5 Most publications discuss patients with EF less than 30%, and their clinical outcomes have proven to be poor. 6 9 As the number of patients with EF < 30% in our study group was only 29, we chose EF < 40% as the criterion of poor LV function. However, we found no significant differences in terms of hospital mortality or morbidity between patients with EF 30%–39% and those with EF < 30%, but our study excluded patients who underwent LV surgery, which may have influenced our results.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…5 Most publications discuss patients with EF less than 30%, and their clinical outcomes have proven to be poor. 6 9 As the number of patients with EF < 30% in our study group was only 29, we chose EF < 40% as the criterion of poor LV function. However, we found no significant differences in terms of hospital mortality or morbidity between patients with EF 30%–39% and those with EF < 30%, but our study excluded patients who underwent LV surgery, which may have influenced our results.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%