• Journal of Korea Entertainment Industry Association
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.197-205
• /
• 2019

This study was to compare arterial stiffness and hemodynamic responses between male smokers and non-smokers. This study also investigates the influences of smoking before exercise on arterial stiffness and hemodynamic responses. 24 male subjects of age 20-29 without history of cardiorespiratory disease were divided into smokers and non-smokers. Smokers had more than 5 years of smoking experience. In order to evaluate the effects of pre-exercise smoking, smokers were tested twice, once with a cigarette before the exercise and the other once without one. Data was collected from bio-impedance analysis, SphygmoCor XCEL, graded exercise test, and fitness test. Main results of this study are as follows: First, there are differences between smokers and non-smokers in cardiorespiratory and hemodynamic response functions, as shown by maximal oxygen consumption, exercise duration, and heart rate. Second, the although the arterial stiffness between smokers and non-smokers showed statistically significant differences in the speed of the pulse wave velocity and augmentation index, smoker had a faster rate. It shows that smoking behavior has a negative impact on the cardiovascular system. Third, pre-exercise smoking behavior does have an impact on cardiorespiratory and hemodynamic response functions, as shown by exercise duration and heart rate. Lastly, arterial stiffness between smokers and non-smokers showed statistically not significant in the speed of the pulse wave velocity and augmentation index. However, the difference was not statistically significant. Brachial systolic pressure, a component of pulse wave analysis, on the other hand, was significantly dependent on pre-exercise smoking behavior. Subjects who participated in this study are college students in early 20s. Given their relatively short history of smoking, it is possible that their smoking habits are not severe enough to develop into cardiorespiratory or cardiovascular diseases. But Smokers showed lower levels of cardiopulmonary functions, as maximal oxygen consumption and exercise duration than nonsmokers.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.38 no.2 s.247
• /
• pp.116-122
• /
• 2005

Background: Adverse effects of cardiopulmonary bypass can be avoided by 'Off-pump' coronary artery bypass (OPCAB) surgery. Recent studies have reported that OPCAB had the most beneficial impact on patients at highest risk by reducing bypass-related complications. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcome of OPCAB and conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (CCAB) in patients with poor left ventricular (LV) function. Material and Method: From March 1997 to February 2004, seventy five patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of $35\%$ or less underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting at our institute. Of these patients, 33 patients underwent OPCAB and 42 underwent CCAB. Preoperative risk factors, operative and postoperative outcomes, including LV functional change, were compared and analysed. Result: Patients undergoing CCAB were more likely to have unstable angina, three vessel disease and acute myocardial infarction among the preoperative factors. OPCAB group had significantly lower mean operation time, less numbers of total distal anastomoses per patient and less numbers of distal anastomoses per patient in the circumflex territory than the CCAB group. There was no difference between the groups in regard to in-hospital mortality $(OPCAB\; 9.1\%\;(n=3)\;Vs.\;CCAB\;9.5\%\;(n=4)),$ intubation time, the length of stay in intensive care unit and in hospital postoperatively. Postoperative complication occurred more in CCAB group but did not show statistical difference. On follow-up echocardiography, OPCAB group showed $9.1\%$ improvement in mean LVEF, 4.3 mm decrease in mean left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD) and 4.2 mm decrease in mean left ventricular end-systolic dimension (LVESD). CCAB group showed $11.0\%$ improvement in mean LVEF, 5.1 mm decrease in mean LVEDD and 5.5 mm decrease in mean LVESD. But there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. Conclusion: This study showed that LV function improves postoperatively in patients with severe ischemic LV dysfunction, but failed to show any difference in the degree of improvement between OPCAB and CCAB. In terms of operative mortality rate and LV functional recovery, the results of OPCAB were as good as those of CCAB in patients with poor LV function. But, OPCAB procedure was advantageous in shortening of operative time and in decrease of complications. We recommend OPCAB as the first surgical option for patients with severe LV dysfunction.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.39 no.3 s.260
• /
• pp.184-193
• /
• 2006

Background: Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) has been proven to result in less morbidity. The patients who have left ventricular dysfunction may have benefits by avoiding the adverse effects of the cardiopulmonary bypass. The present study compared early and midterm outcomes of off-pump versus on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (On pump CABG) in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction. Material and Method: Ninety hundred forth six patients underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting by one surgeon between January 2001 and Febrary 2005.. Data were collected in 100 patients who had left ventricular ejection fraction (L VEF) less than $35\%$ (68 OPCAB; 32 On pump CABG). Mean age of patients were 62.9$\pm$9.0 years in OPCAS group and 63.8$\pm$8.0 years in On pump CABG group. We compared the preoperative risk factors and evaluated early and midterm outcomes. Result: In OPCAB and On pump CABG group, mean number of used grafts per patient were 2.75$\pm$0.72, 2.78$\pm$0.55 and mean number of distal anastomoses were 3.00$\pm$0.79, 3.16$\pm$0.72 respectively. There was one perioperative death in OPCAB group ($1.5\%$). The operation time, ventilation time, ICU stay time, CK-MB on the first postoperative day, and occurrence rate of complications were significantly low in OPCAB group. Mean follow-up time was 26.6$\pm$12.8 months (4${\~}$54 months). Mean LVEF of OPCAB and On pump CABG group improved significantly from $27.1\pm4.5\%$ to $40.7\pm13.0\%$ and $26.9\pm5.4\%$ to $33.3\pm13.7\%$. The 4-year actuarial survival rate of OPCAB and On pump CABG group were $92.2\%,\;88.3\%$ and the 4-year freedom rates from cardiac death were $97.7\%,\;96.4\%$ respectively. There were no significant differences between two groups in 4 year freedom rate from cardiac event and angina. Conclusion: OPCAS improves myocardial function and favors early and mid-term outcomes in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction compared to On pump CABG group. Therefore, OPCAB is a preferable operative strategy even in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction.